Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Apr;29(2):E6-E14.
doi: 10.1111/jerd.12263. Epub 2016 Sep 13.

Appearance Differences Between Lots and Brands of Similar Shade Designations of Dental Composite Resins

Melody N Carney  1 , William M Johnston  2
Affiliations

Appearance Differences Between Lots and Brands of Similar Shade Designations of Dental Composite Resins

Melody N Carney et al. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017 Apr.

Abstract

Objectives: The purposes of this study were to investigate differences in two inherent appearance characteristics between lots of an enamel dental composite resin of the same shade and brand, and to further compare these differences to those of similar shade designation of a different brand of dental composite resins.

Methods: Appearance analyses proceeded for three different lots of shades A1, B2, and D3 manufactured by one company and for one lot of shade EA1 manufactured by another. Samples were measured on black, white, and gray backings using spectroradiometry. Kubelka-Munk theory was used to determine reflectivity of each lot studied. CIELAB values and color differences between shades and lots were analyzed. Translucency indicators were compared between lots over thicknesses from 0.5 to 3.0 mm.

Results: Differences in inherent color between some lots of same shade designations within a brand were found to be above the acceptability threshold. Color difference between an enamel composite resin of shade A1 and a composite resin of shade EA1 was also above the acceptability threshold. Statistically significant differences in the translucency were found between some lots of one shade over the entire range of thicknesses studied.

Conclusion: Appearance analyses indicate substantial variation between lots of same shade designations as well as between brands of similar shade designations.

Clinical significance: Optical principles applied to important clinical appearance attributes are described which characterize inherent appearance attributes and provide aid in the appearance matching process for dental composite resins used in restorative and operative dental procedures. (J Esthet Restor Dent 29:E6-E14, 2017).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure

The authors do not have any financial interest in the companies whose materials are included in this article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Agreements between the directly determined reflectance values and the reflectance associated with K-M reflectance theory for selected sets. The lines of the K-M reflectance theory for the White, Gray and Black backings are mixed dotted-dashed, dashed and solid, respectively, and the symbols for the directly determined values on the White, Gray and Black backings are the asterisk (*), the X and the plus sign (+), respectively.
Figure 1
Figure 1
Agreements between the directly determined reflectance values and the reflectance associated with K-M reflectance theory for selected sets. The lines of the K-M reflectance theory for the White, Gray and Black backings are mixed dotted-dashed, dashed and solid, respectively, and the symbols for the directly determined values on the White, Gray and Black backings are the asterisk (*), the X and the plus sign (+), respectively.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean TP values using the CIEDE2000 color difference formula for each Shade and Lot studied.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Color differences (CIEDE2000) between materials studied (Shade/Lot) with identical or similar Shade.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sproull RC. Color matching in dentistry. Part III. Color control. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1974;31(2):146–54. - PubMed
    1. Schwabacher WB, Goodkind RJ. Three-dimensional color coordinates of natural teeth compared with three shade guides. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1990;64(4):425–31. - PubMed
    1. Kim BJ, Lee YK. Influence of the shade designation on the color difference between the same shade-designated resin composites by the brand. Dental Materials. 2009;25(9):1148–54. - PubMed
    1. Chu SJ, Trushkowsky RD, Paravina RD. Dental color matching instruments and systems. Review of clinical and research aspects. Journal of Dentistry. 2010;38(Suppl 2):e2–16. - PubMed
    1. da Costa J, Fox P, Ferracane J. Comparison of various resin composite shades and layering technique with a shade guide. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 2010;22(2):114–24. - PubMed