Abstract
This study investigated the colorimetric properties of different veneering materials on core materials. Standardized specimens (10 mm × 10 mm × 1.5 mm) reflecting four core (polyetheretherketone (PEEK), zirconia (ZrO2), cobalt–chromium–molybdenum alloy (CoCrMo), and titanium oxide (TiO2); thickness: 1.5 mm) and veneering materials (VITA Mark II, IPS e.max CAD, LAVA Ultimate and VITA Enamic, all in shade A3; thickness: 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2 mm, respectively) were fabricated. Specimens were superimposed to assemblies, and the color was determined with a spectrophotometer (CieLab-System) or a chair-side color measurement device (VITA EasyShade), respectively. Data were analyzed using three-, two-, and one-way ANOVA, a Chi2-test, and a Wilson approach (p < 0.05). The measurements with EasyShade showed A2 for VITA Mark II, A3.5 for VITA Enamic, B2 for LAVA Ultimate, and B3 for IPS e.max CAD. LabE-values showed significant differences between the tested veneering materials (p < 0.001). CieLab-System and VITA EasyShade parameters of the different assemblies showed a significant impact of core (p < 0.001), veneering material (p < 0.001), and thickness of the veneering material (p < 0.001). PEEK as core material showed comparable outcomes as compared to ZrO2 and CoCrMo, with respect to CieLab-System parameters for each veneering material. The relative frequency of the measured VITA EasyShade parameters regarding PEEK cores also showed comparable results as compared to the gold standard CoCrMo, regardless of the veneering material used.
Highlights
Restoring and replacing teeth with computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) [1] has gained in popularity and become a key competence in dentistry
The color of the latter may greatly influence the appearance of the whole restoration and may hamper adequate esthetics [6]
The chair side tooth shade was defined with A3 according to the manufacturer of all four veneering materials (Table 1)
Summary
Restoring and replacing teeth with computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) [1] has gained in popularity and become a key competence in dentistry. Oral rehabilitation is delicate in terms of functional and esthetic outcomes and only an adequate material choice and processing can ensure long-term stability and patient satisfaction on teeth and implants [2,3]. At first sight, the esthetic appearance of any restoration is of great subjective importance for patient and oral care provider, other significant aspects like biocompatibility, function, and longevity play a substantial role [4]. The color of the latter may greatly influence the appearance of the whole restoration and may hamper adequate esthetics [6]. Besides physical-chemical testing, the materials ability to mimic the natural tooth substance with regard to translucency, opalescence, and overall color is important when screening and evaluating potential restorative materials and combinations thereof [7]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
