Quantitative analysis of color accuracy and bias in 4 dental CAD-CAM monolithic restorative materials with different thicknesses: An in vitro study

Abstract

Statement of problemComputer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) monolithic restorative materials have become a popular option because of advantages such as convenience and efficiency. However, studies that quantitatively analyzed their color accuracy and bias are lacking. PurposeThe purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the color accuracy and bias of 4 CAD-CAM monolithic restorative materials with different thicknesses by using the CIELab color space. Material and methodsFour types of dental CAD-CAM monolithic restorative materials in shade A2, lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (IPS e.max CAD), infiltrated ceramic (VITA Enamic), resin-nano ceramic (LAVA Ultimate), and polymethyl methacrylate (Telio CAD), were prepared as 12×12-mm specimens of 10 different thicknesses (from 0.5 to 5.0 mm) (N=200, n=5). After polishing with SiC P1500-grit, CIELab color coordinate parameters of the specimens were measured with a spectrophotometer (VITA Easyshade V). The color accuracy and bias were described by ΔE00, ΔL∗, Δa∗, and Δb∗ in the CIELab color space, and the data were analyzed by using a 2-way ANOVA, post hoc Tukey-Kramer test, and the t test (α=.05). ResultsThe ΔE00, ΔL∗, Δa∗, and Δb∗ were significantly influenced by material type and thickness (P<.001). Specimens at a thickness of 0.5 mm represented the maximum ΔE00. The minimum ΔE00 was observed at a thickness of 2.0 mm for LAVA Ultimate, 1.5 mm for VITA Enamic and Telio CAD, and 4.0 mm for IPS e.max CAD. The ΔE00 of all specimens significantly exceeded the 50:50% acceptability threshold (1.8 unit) (P<.001). LU exhibited higher ΔE00, Δa∗, and Δb∗ than the other 3 materials in all thickness expect for 0.5 mm. For color bias, the ΔE00 was more influenced by Δb∗ and ΔL∗ than Δa∗. ConclusionsThe color accuracy and bias were significantly affected by material type and thickness. The color inaccuracy of the tested materials was statistically significant and clinically perceptible. Improved clinical outcomes may be expected from the 1.5-mm- to 2.0-mm-thick restorations.