Rajati Haghi Hamidreza, Nejat Amir H, Dashti Hossein, Ghaemi Delaram, Saeedi Faeze, Yarmoradian Sina
Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Louisiana State University School of Dentistry, New Orleans, LA.
J Prosthet Dent. 2025 Sep;134(3):760.e1-760.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.05.015. Epub 2025 Jun 4.
The influence of ceramic type, cement shade, and ceramic thickness on the final color of the restoration and its masking ability is unclear.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of the ceramic type and translucency parameters, ceramic thickness, and cement shade on the color of the definitive restoration and its masking ability.
A total of 120 ceramic specimens were fabricated in different thicknesses and divided into 10 groups: high translucency zirconia (HTZ 0.8, 1.2, 1.6 and 2 mm) (ZX2 98; Dental Direct), porcelain-fused-to-zirconia (PFZ1.5 and 2 mm) (DD Bio ZW iso color High Strength; Dental Direkt), monolithic low translucency lithium disilicate (LT 1 and 1.5 mm) (e.max; Ivoclar AG), bilayered glass-ceramic with a high opaque lithium disilicate (HO 1.5 and 2 mm) (e.max; Ivoclar AG). The color and translucency of the specimens were measured based on the Lab values and remeasured after applying resin cement evaluation pastes (Panavia V5 Try in paste; Kuraray Dental) in 3 colors: A2, opaque (O), or white (W) over 2 background materials (nickel chromium alloy or composite resin shade A2). The VITA Classic shade guide was used as the reference Lab value to evaluate the color matching capability of different ceramic-cement combinations. Color change (ΔE) was measured, and the perceptibility threshold (PT) was set at 2.6 and the acceptability threshold (AT) at 5.5.
The mean ΔE of the specimens ranged from 0.4 to 4.5. The type of ceramic significantly affected the color and translucency parameter (P<.001). In all groups, translucency decreased significantly with the increasing thickness of the ceramic (P<.001). According to the perceptibility threshold, the color of the nickel chromium background could be concealed by all 2 shades of cement (A2, opaque, and white). Nevertheless, the LT 1-mm, LT 1.5-mm, HTZ 0.8-mm, and HTZ 1.2-mm groups exhibited noticeable color changes when opaque cement was applied. Specimens with lower translucency parameters had better color matching with the A2 color. The HTZ 0.8-mm A2, LT 1-mm A2, and HTZ 0.8-mm W groups showed the least color match, with mean ΔE values of 12.4, 11.9, and 11.3, respectively. However, the PFZ 2-mm O and PFZ 2-mm W groups exhibited the best color match, with mean ΔE values of 1 and 1.4.
The thickness of the ceramic had a significant effect on its translucency. Moreover, the translucency of the ceramic influenced its masking ability and had a direct correlation with the color change in the presence of cement. Ceramic materials with an opaque framework had lower translucency but better color matching with the reference shade.
陶瓷类型、粘结剂色度以及陶瓷厚度对修复体最终颜色及其遮色能力的影响尚不清楚。
本体外研究的目的是调查陶瓷类型和透明度参数、陶瓷厚度以及粘结剂色度对最终修复体颜色及其遮色能力的影响。
共制作了120个不同厚度的陶瓷试件,并分为10组:高透明度氧化锆(HTZ 0.8、1.2、1.6和2毫米)(ZX2 98;Dental Direct)、氧化锆全瓷冠(PFZ 1.5和2毫米)(DD Bio ZW iso color High Strength;Dental Direkt)、整体式低透明度二硅酸锂(LT 1和1.5毫米)(e.max;Ivoclar AG)、具有高不透明度二硅酸锂的双层玻璃陶瓷(HO 1.5和2毫米)(e.max;Ivoclar AG)。基于Lab值测量试件的颜色和透明度,并在两种背景材料(镍铬合金或复合树脂色度A2)上涂抹三种颜色(A2、不透明(O)或白色(W))的树脂粘结剂评估糊剂(Panavia V5试戴糊剂;可乐丽牙科)后重新测量。使用VITA经典比色板作为参考Lab值来评估不同陶瓷-粘结剂组合的颜色匹配能力。测量颜色变化(ΔE),将可察觉阈值(PT)设定为2.6,可接受阈值(AT)设定为5.5。
试件的平均ΔE范围为0.4至4.5。陶瓷类型对颜色和透明度参数有显著影响(P<0.001)。在所有组中,随着陶瓷厚度的增加,透明度显著降低(P<0.001)。根据可察觉阈值,镍铬背景的颜色可被两种色度的粘结剂(A2、不透明和白色)遮盖。然而,当应用不透明粘结剂时,LT 1毫米、LT 1.5毫米、HTZ 0.8毫米和HTZ 1.2毫米组表现出明显的颜色变化。透明度参数较低的试件与A2颜色的颜色匹配更好。HTZ 0.8毫米A2、LT 1毫米A2和HTZ 0.8毫米W组的颜色匹配最差,平均ΔE值分别为12.4、11.9和11.3。然而,PFZ 2毫米O和PFZ 2毫米W组表现出最佳的颜色匹配,平均ΔE值为1和1.4。
陶瓷厚度对其透明度有显著影响。此外,陶瓷的透明度影响其遮色能力,并且与存在粘结剂时的颜色变化直接相关。具有不透明框架的陶瓷材料透明度较低,但与参考色度的颜色匹配更好。