Search

High‐translucency restorative materials are commonly used in the restoration of anterior teeth where aesthetics is a critical factor. In this in vitro study, the impact of mouthwash on the colour stability and surface characteristics of high‐translucency computer‐aided design and computer‐aided manufacturing (CAD‐CAM) dental restorative materials was evaluated. Two‐hundred specimens were fabricated from five high‐translucency CAD‐CAM materials: a resin nano ceramic; a polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network; a feldspathic ceramic; a lithium disilicate glass ceramic; and high‐translucency zirconia. Each group of ceramic specimens was then divided into four subgroups: conventional mouthwash (LISTERINE); whitening mouthwash (LISTERINE Healthy White); chlorhexidine gluconate; and distilled water. Oral rinsing was simulated at 100 rpm for 180 h, representing 15 yr of clinical simulation. The specimens were then evaluated for colour, translucency, gloss, roughness, and surface morphology. Two‐way ANOVA and linear mixed models were used for intergroup comparisons (α = 0.05). The polymer‐infiltrated ceramic network and feldspathic ceramic became brighter, more opaque, less glossy, and rougher after rinsing with the whitening mouthwash. The long‐term use of specific mouthwashes can cause deterioration of the optical and surface properties of high‐translucency CAD‐CAM dental restorations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effects of substrate colors, different levels of ceramic thickness and translucency, and cement shades on the color difference from a reference color of lithium‐disilicate crowns. Materials and Methods: A premolar tooth preparation was made on a study model for 1.0 and 1.5 mm thick full‐ceramic crowns. Digital impressions were taken (3Shape TRIOS) and crowns designed in a CAD program (DentalDesigner). Shade A1 crowns were milled (Everest, Kavo) from high‐translucency (HT) and low‐translucency IPS e.max (Ivoclar Vivadent) blocks. Twelve substrates were made of different colors and materials (Natural Die Material, Co‐Cr, zirconia, and gold‐colored alloy). Three different shades of try‐in pastes were used to simulate the effect of cements (Variolink Esthetic try‐in paste; Ivoclar). Shade measurement was done three times for each crown by a spectrophotometer (VITA Easyshade Advance); averages were compared to a reference crown (A1, HT, 1.5 mm, ND2 abutment, neutral try‐in paste) with ΔE00 (CIEDE2000, according to the CIE latest standard) calculated. Results: All the examined parameters influenced the ΔE00 of the crowns. The weakest effect was exerted by the try‐in paste. Conclusions: All examined parameters influenced the final color of e.max CAD lithium‐disilicate ceramic crowns. Clinical Significance: Matching the shade of ceramic crowns to the natural tooth color is a great challenge in dentistry. To meet patients' increasing esthetical expectations, CAD/CAM methods are very popular for full‐ceramic crowns. However, several factors such as the shade of the abutment, luting cement color, ceramic thickness, and translucency may influence the final color. Our objective was to measure the optical effect of these factors on the final shade of CAD/CAM lithium‐disilicate ceramic crowns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]