Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2013
The effect of variations in translucency and background on color differences in CAD/CAM lithium disilicate glass ceramics.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Al Ben Ali Abdulaziz, Kang Kiho, Finkelman Matthew D, Zandparsa Roya, Hirayama Hiroshi
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of variations in translucency and background on color differences (ΔE) for different shades of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) lithium disilicate glass ceramics.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A pilot study suggested n = 10 as an appropriate sample size for the number of lithium disilicate glass ceramic cylinders per group. High-transparency (HT) and low-transparency (LT) cylinders (diameter, 12 mm; length, 13 mm) were fabricated in three ceramic shades (BL1, A2, C3) using CAD/CAM technology and were cut into specimen disks (thickness, 1.2 mm; diameter, 12 mm) for placement on Natural Die (ND1 and ND4) backgrounds. Four combinations of translucency and background color were evaluated in terms of color differences for the three ceramic shades: group 1 (HT ND1, reference), group 2 (HT ND4), group 3 (LT ND1), and group 4 (LT ND4). A spectrophotometer was used to measure the color differences. Nonparametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis tests) were used to evaluate the color differences among the tested groups, and Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction were used as post hoc tests. Furthermore, for each ceramic shade, the HT groups were compared to the LT groups using the Mann-Whitney U test.
RESULTS: Significant differences were present among the tested groups of the same ceramic shade (p < 0.001). The highest ΔE values were observed in the HT ND4 group for BL1, while the lowest ΔE values were found in the LT ND1 group for both A2 and C3. Further, the HT groups and the groups with a darker background (ND4) showed increased ΔE values compared with the other groups (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, the results suggested that the translucency and background color significantly influenced the lithium disilicate glass ceramic color among the BL1, A2, and C3 ceramic shades. Changing the underlying color from a lighter background to a darker background resulted in increased color differences.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A pilot study suggested n = 10 as an appropriate sample size for the number of lithium disilicate glass ceramic cylinders per group. High-transparency (HT) and low-transparency (LT) cylinders (diameter, 12 mm; length, 13 mm) were fabricated in three ceramic shades (BL1, A2, C3) using CAD/CAM technology and were cut into specimen disks (thickness, 1.2 mm; diameter, 12 mm) for placement on Natural Die (ND1 and ND4) backgrounds. Four combinations of translucency and background color were evaluated in terms of color differences for the three ceramic shades: group 1 (HT ND1, reference), group 2 (HT ND4), group 3 (LT ND1), and group 4 (LT ND4). A spectrophotometer was used to measure the color differences. Nonparametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis tests) were used to evaluate the color differences among the tested groups, and Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction were used as post hoc tests. Furthermore, for each ceramic shade, the HT groups were compared to the LT groups using the Mann-Whitney U test.
RESULTS: Significant differences were present among the tested groups of the same ceramic shade (p < 0.001). The highest ΔE values were observed in the HT ND4 group for BL1, while the lowest ΔE values were found in the LT ND1 group for both A2 and C3. Further, the HT groups and the groups with a darker background (ND4) showed increased ΔE values compared with the other groups (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, the results suggested that the translucency and background color significantly influenced the lithium disilicate glass ceramic color among the BL1, A2, and C3 ceramic shades. Changing the underlying color from a lighter background to a darker background resulted in increased color differences.