Objectives: Translucency of the natural dentition should be simulated in order to create optimal esthetic dental restoration. Composite resin materials attempt to restore the color and appearance of natural teeth. However, current composite resin systems display various degree of translucency. The purpose of this study was to characterize the translucency of 3 flowable and 4 hybid resin composites. Methods: Composite resin discs with diameters approximately 8mm were made by injecting materials onto a silicone coated glass slide and flattened to 1 mm with another silicone coated glass slide and light cured for 40 seconds. The resin discs(3 samples for each shade) was measured in CIE L*a*b* coordinates using a tristimulus colorimeter. Translucency was assessed by calculating the contrast ratio of shade value (L*) in front of black vs. white backgrounds. Results: Mean contrast ratio values (standard deviations) were: Unifil F (GC) A2: 0.779(0.015) A3: 0.791(0.015), Tetric Ceram(Vivadent) A2: 0.741(0.003) A3: 0.747(0.006), Filtek A110 E(3M) A2: 0.756(0.002) A3: 0.756(0.005), Filtek A110 D A2: 0.805(0.004) A3: 0.798(0.003), Unifil flow A2: 0.767(0.019) A3: 0.798(0.009), Terric flow A2: 0.687(0.008) A3: 0.691(0.006), Filtek flow A2: 0.808(0.005) A3: 0.819(0.009). Conclusion: ANOVA analysis showed statistically difference between Tetric Ceram and Tetric flow, Filtek E and Filtek D(p<0.01). This suggests that different composite resins render different translucency and this characteristic should be considered when the restorative material restore the natural teeth.

Back to the Dental Materials: VIII - Others-Non-metallic Program
Back to the IADR/AADR/CADR 83rd General Session (March 9-12, 2005)

Top Level Search