Comparison of translucency and opalescence among different dental monolithic ceramics

Mohammadjavad Shirani; Omid Savabi; Ramin Mosharraf; Mehrdad Akhavankhaleghi; Maliheh Hebibkhodaei; Sabire Isler

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.04.030

Comparison of translucency and opalescence among different dental monolithic ceramics

J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Sep;126(3):446.e1-446.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.04.030. Epub 2021 Jul 23.

Authors

Mohammadjavad Shirani¹, Omid Savabi², Ramin Mosharraf³, Mehrdad Akhavankhaleghi⁴, Maliheh Hebibkhodaei⁵, Sabire Isler⁶

Affiliations

¹ Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Lorestan University of Medical Sciences, Khorramabad, Iran.
² Professor of Prosthodontics, Dental Research Center, Dental Research Institute, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
³ Professor of Prosthodontics, Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Materials Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. Electronic address: Mosharraf@dnt.mui.ac.ir.
⁴ Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran.
⁵ Post Graduate student of Prosthodontics, Student Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
⁶ Professor of Prosthodontics, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey.

PMID: 34304886
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.04.030

Abstract

Statement of problem: Monolithic ceramic restorations designed by computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing are increasingly being used by clinicians. With the introduction of new materials, their optical characteristics also need to be investigated.

Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the translucency and opalescence of lithium disilicate, zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate, presintered zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate, polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network material, and multilayer zirconia.

Material and methods: A total of 50 rectangular plates (14×12×1 mm) of 5 monolithic ceramics were prepared in this in vitro study (n=10). Each zirconia specimen was divided into 3 groups of incisal, middle, and gingival thirds. Each group was then evaluated separately. The color parameters of specimens were measured on 3 backgrounds, white, black, and #3 Ivoclar Natural Die Color material, by using a spectrophotometer. The translucency and opalescence of the specimens were determined by the relevant equations, and between-group comparisons were made. One-way ANOVA and Tamhane post hoc tests were used to compare groups (α=.05).

Results: The difference among the groups was significant in translucency (F=137.346, df=6, P<.001), contrast ratio (F=134.148, df=6, P<.001), and opalescence parameters (F=128.028, df=6, P<.001). The 3 zirconia groups (10.87 ±0.54 to 11.88 ±0.26) had a significantly lower translucency than the other groups, and the zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate group (18.14 ±0.74) showed the highest translucency. Zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (12.36 ±0.42) had the highest opalescence, and the lowest opalescence was found for polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network (5.43 ±0.28) and the incisal third of zirconia (5.45 ±1.06).

Conclusions: The zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate and presintered zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate specimens had the highest translucency and opalescence. The studied multilayer zirconia, which had different cubic phase values from incisal to gingival blank, showed similar translucency over the entire range, and differences among different regions were related to chromatic variables.

MeSH terms

Ceramics
Color
Computer-Aided Design
Dental Porcelain*
Iridescence*
Materials Testing
Surface Properties
Zirconium

Substances

Dental Porcelain
Zirconium