Staining potential differences between an infiltrative resin and an esthetic, flowable composite

To compare color change magnitude of an infiltrative resin and a flowable composite resin after immersion in commonly consumed beverages.

Disks (1 × 9 mm) of a flowable composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable) and a resin-infiltrative product (Icon) were made. Specimens were dark-stored in tap water (24 hours). Baseline color parameters (CIE L*a*b*) were obtained using a colorimeter (Easyshade V4, VITA). Specimens were immersed (dark stored, 37°C, 1 week) in commercial beverages: Kool-Aid, coffee, Coca-Cola, and tap water (control). ΔE₀₀ between final and baseline conditions for each material/beverage combination was determined (N = 10/group). Initial analysis of variance indicated significant impact of major factors/interactions on ΔE₀₀ . Subsequently, t-tests between ΔE₀₀ values of restorative materials within each beverage was performed: alpha 0.05.

Kool-Aid produced the greatest color change for flowable composite, with a ΔE₀₀ significantly greater than the infiltrative product. No significant ΔE₀₀ differences were noted between products immersed in coffee, however color parameters causing these differences were not similar. Water or Coca-Cola immersion showed lowest ΔE₀₀ values for both materials, considered visually imperceptible: ΔE₀₀ values <0.8.

Color change potential of infiltrative resin or resin composite was highly dependent on beverage type, with no general trends observed in which material was affected more.

Staining potential of an infiltrative restorative resin differs from that of a filled, flowable composite material on a beverage-by-beverage basis. The potential for color change seems not related to the presence or absence of fillers in the restorative material.