Abstract This study assessed the color-matching ability and color recovery of unprepared teeth when using single-shade composites and a universal composite in large restorations. Buccal and palatine surface colors of molars were measured with a spectrophotometer (CIELAB) before preparing round cavities (6 mm in diameter, 2 mm in depth). The cavities were randomly filled with a single-shade composite (Omnichroma, Diamond One, or Vittra APS Unique) or a universal composite (Filtek Universal). Color measurements of the restored cavities were taken, and overall color differences (ΔEab and ΔE00) and differences in the whitening index for dentistry (ΔWID) from baseline were calculated. Additionally, visual assessments of a color match to the surrounding enamel were performed by forty evaluators (laypersons and undergraduate students of dentistry) in a viewing booth under illuminant D65, with rating scores from 0 (no color mismatch) to 4 (not acceptable). Data were analyzed using RM or one-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results showed that the restorations generally exhibited whiter colors (WID ranged from 27.9 to 41.3) than the unprepared teeth (WID ranged from 15.9 to 19.3). The composite Filtek Universal demonstrated the lowest color discrepancy (ΔWID = 8.6; ΔE00 = 10.8; and ΔE00 = 6.2), and no significant differences were observed among the evaluated single-shade composites. Furthermore, all composites showed similar and adequate color matches to the surrounding enamel. However, it is important to note that despite their ability to match the surrounding enamel reasonably, none of the composites evaluated in large restorations fully recovered the color observed in unprepared teeth. colormatching matching singleshade single shade CIELAB (CIELAB 6 ( diameter depth. depth . depth) Omnichroma, Omnichroma (Omnichroma One Unique Universal. Universal) taken ΔEab ΔE ΔWID calculated Additionally laypersons D65 D mismatch not acceptable. acceptable acceptable) oneway one way α 0.05. 005 0.05 05 0.05) WID 279 27 9 27. 41.3 413 41 3 159 15 15. 19.3. 193 19.3 19 19.3) 8.6 86 8 ΔE0 10.8 108 10 6.2, 62 6.2 , 6.2) Furthermore However reasonably D6 00 0.0 41. 1 19. 8. 10. 6. 0.

Resumo Este estudo avaliou a habilidade de combinação de cores e recuperação de cor de dentes não preparados ao utilizar resinas compostas de única tonalidade e uma resina composta universal em grandes restaurações. As cores das superfícies bucais e palatinas de molares foram medidas com um espectrofotômetro (CIELAB) antes de preparar cavidades esféricas (6 mm de diâmetro, 2 mm de profundidade). As cavidades foram preenchidas aleatoriamente com uma resina composta de única tonalidade (Omnichroma, Diamond One ou Vittra APS Unique) ou com uma resina composta universal (Filtek Universal). Foram realizadas medições das cores das cavidades restauradas e calculadas as diferenças de cor globais (ΔEab and ΔE00)) e as diferenças no índice de clareamento para odontologia (ΔWID) em relação à cor inicial. Além disso, foram realizadas avaliações visuais da correspondência de cor com o esmalte circundante por quarenta avaliadores (leigos e estudantes de odontologia) em uma cabine de visualização sob iluminante D65, com pontuações de 0 (nenhuma discrepância de cor) a 4 (não aceitável). Os dados foram analisados usando RM ou ANOVA unidirecional (α = 0,05). Os resultados mostraram que as restaurações geralmente apresentavam cores mais brancas (WID variou de 27,9 a 41,3) do que os dentes não preparados (WID variou de 15,9 a 19,3). A resina composta Filtek Universal demonstrou a menor discrepância de cor (ΔWID = 8,6; ΔE00 = 10,8; and ΔE00 = 6,2), e não foram observadas diferenças significativas entre as resinas compostas de única tonalidade avaliadas. Além disso, todas as resinas compostas apresentaram correspondência de cor similar e adequada com o esmalte circundante. No entanto, é importante observar que, apesar de sua capacidade de corresponder razoavelmente com o esmalte circundante, nenhuma das resinas compostas avaliadas em grandes restaurações recuperou completamente a cor observada nos dentes não preparados. CIELAB (CIELAB 6 ( diâmetro profundidade. profundidade . profundidade) Omnichroma, Omnichroma (Omnichroma Unique Universal. Universal) ΔEab ΔE ΔE00) ΔWID inicial disso leigos D65 D aceitável. aceitável aceitável) α 0,05. 005 0,05 05 0,05) WID 279 27 9 27, 41,3 413 41 3 159 15 15, 19,3. 193 19,3 19 19,3) 8,6 86 8 ΔE0 10,8 108 10 6,2, 62 6,2 , 6,2) entanto D6 00 0,0 41, 1 19, 8, 10, 6, 0,

Abstract Repositioning guides are commonly employed in clinical studies to ensure consistent tooth color measurements. Yet, their influence on measured color remains uncertain. Objective This study evaluated the impact of repositioning guides’ color and usage on tooth color measurement using a clinical spectrophotometer. Methodology In total, 18 volunteers participated in this study, in which the color of their upper left central incisor and upper left canine was measured with or without repositioning guides (control). The guides were made from pink, blue, or translucent silicone, as well as an acetate-based bleaching tray. Tooth color was measured in triplicates using a clinical spectrophotometer based on the CIELAB system. The standard deviations of these readings were used to estimate reproducibility, and color differences (ΔE00) between the measurements with guides and the control were calculated. Results Repositioning guides had a minimal effect on L* values and no effect on b* values. The use of pink silicone increased a* values, whereas blue or translucent silicone reduced them. Irrespective of the evaluated tooth, the lowest ΔE00 values were observed for the translucent silicone and bleaching tray. The usage of guides only affected data variability for the L* color coordinate. Conclusion Using repositioning guides can significantly impact the precision of tooth color measurement with a clinical spectrophotometer. Yet uncertain total 1 control. . (control) acetatebased acetate tray system reproducibility ΔE (ΔE00 calculated L b them ΔE0 coordinate (control (ΔE0 (ΔE

Abstract This study evaluated the background and effect of surrounding colors on the color blending of a single-shade composite used in a thin layer. Disc-shaped specimens (1.0 mm thickness) were built with the Vittra APS Unique composite surrounded (dual specimens) or not surrounded (simple specimens) by a control composite (shade A1, A2, or A3). Simple specimens were also built with only control composites. The specimen color was measured against white and black backgrounds with a spectrophotometer (CIELAB system). The whiteness index for dentistry (WID) was calculated for simple specimens. Differences (ΔE00) in color and translucency parameters (ΔTP00) between the simple/dual specimens and the controls were calculated. The translucency adjustment potential (TAP) and color adjustment potential (CAP) were estimated based on the ratios between data from simple and dual specimens. The Vittra APS Unique composite showed higher WID values than the controls. No differences between ΔTP00_SIMPLE and ΔTP00_DUAL were observed for any of the shades. The composite shade did not affect TAP values. The lowest values of ΔE00_SIMPLE and ΔE00_DUAL were observed for shade A1 regardless of the background color. For the white background, ΔE00_SIMPLE values did not differ from those of ΔE00_DUAL for all shades. Only A1 showed ΔE00_DUAL values lower than ΔE00_SIMPLE when the black background was used. The highest modulus of CAP (negative values for the white background) was observed when shade A1 surrounded the Vittra APS Unique composite. The color blending ability of the single-shade resin composite used in a thin layer was affected by both the surrounding shade and background color. singleshade single Discshaped Disc shaped 1.0 10 1 0 (1. thickness A A2 A3. A3 . A3) composites CIELAB system. system system) (WID ΔE00 ΔE (ΔE00 ΔTP00 ΔTP (ΔTP00 simpledual (TAP (CAP ΔTP00SIMPLE ΔTPSIMPLE SIMPLE ΔTP00DUAL ΔTPDUAL DUAL shades ΔE00SIMPLE ΔESIMPLE ΔE00DUAL ΔEDUAL negative 1. (1 ΔE0 (ΔE0 ΔTP0 (ΔTP0 ( (ΔE (ΔTP

Resumo Este estudo avaliou o efeito da cor circundante e da espessura da amostra no potencial de ajuste de cor (PAC) de uma resina monocromática. O compósito Vittra APS Unique foi circundado (amostras duplas) ou não (amostras simples) com um compósito controle (cor A1, A2 ou A3). Amostras simples do compósito controle também foram confeccionadas. A opacidade e o índice de brancura para odontologia (IBO) foram calculados para as amostras simples. As diferenças de cor entre amostras simples (ΔE*SIMPLE) / duplas (ΔE*DUAL) e os controles foram calculados. PAC foi calculado baseado na razão entre ΔE* SIMPLE e ΔE* DUAL. O compósito testado apresentou menor opacidade (53 a 62% vs. 80 a 93%) e maior IBO (≈ 42 vs. 18 a 32) que os controles. Independente da espessura da amostra (1,0/ 1,5 mm), os valores mais baixos de ΔE* SIMPLE (11,1/ 10,8) e ΔE*DUAL (7,2/ 6,1) foram observadas quando a resina circundante era A1. A cor A3 resultou em maior ΔE*SIMPLE (16,4/ 17,1) e ΔE* DUAL (11,3/ 12,3) do que A2 (ΔE*SIMPLE = 13,4/ 14,6; e ΔE* DUAL = 9,7/ 10,3). A espessura das amostras afetou significativamente o PAC (0,35 e 0,44 para 1,0 e 1,5 mm, respectivamente) apenas para a cor A1, que teve os maiores valores de PAC. A cor A3 resultou nos maiores valores de PAC (0,31) que A2 (0,27) quando amostras de 1,0 mm de espessura foram usadas, mas valores similares foram observados para amostras de 1,5 mm (≈ 0,29). Como conclusão, tanto a cor circundante como a espessura das amostras podem afetar o PAC de um compósito resinoso monocromático.

Abstract This study evaluated the effect of surrounded shade and specimens` thickness on the color adjustment potential (CAP) of a single-shade composite. The composite Vittra APS Unique was surrounded (dual specimens) or not (simple specimens) by a control composite (shade A1, A2, or A3). Simple specimens of the control composite were also confectioned. Opacity and whiteness index for dentistry (WID) were calculated for simple specimens. Color differences between the simple (ΔE*SIMPLE)/ dual specimens (ΔE*DUAL) and the controls were calculated. CAP was calculated based on the ratio between ΔE* SIMPLE and ΔE* DUAL. The tested composite presented lower opacity (53 to 62% vs. 80 to 93%) and higher WID (≈ 42 vs. 18 to 32) than controls. Irrespective of the specimens’ thickness (1.0/ 1.5 mm), the lowest values of ΔE* SIMPLE (11.1/ 10.8) and ΔE*DUAL (7.2/ 6.1) were observed using the surrounding shade A1. The shade A3 yielded higher ΔE*SIMPLE (16.4/ 17.1) and ΔE* DUAL (11.3/ 12.3) than the A2 (ΔE*SIMPLE = 13.4/ 14.6; and ΔE* DUAL = 9.7/ 10.3). The specimen`s thickness significantly affected the CAP (0.35 and 0.44 for 1.0 and 1.5 mm, respectively) only for shade A1, which had the highest CAP values. The shade A3 resulted in higher CAP values (0.31) than A2 (0.27) when 1.0-mm thick specimens were used, but similar values were observed for 1.5 thick specimens (≈ 0.29). In conclusion, both surrounding shade and specimen thickness can affect the CAP of a single-shade resin composite.