Color Assessment of Feldspathic Ceramic with Two Different Thicknesses, Using Multiple Polymeric Cements

Prior research has shown that luting agents can influence ceramic color outcomes. However, the interaction between cement shade and ceramic thickness remains unclear. No prior work had resolved how these variables interact to affect esthetics. This gap motivated a focused investigation on feldspathic ceramics. It was already known that ceramic thickness affects translucency. Yet, the extent of cement impact remained uncertain. No study had tested multiple cement types with varying thicknesses. This uncertainty drove the need for controlled experimental testing. The goal was to isolate variables and measure their combined effects.

This study aimed to assess how cement choice and ceramic thickness affect final color outcomes. The specific problem was understanding esthetic variability in ceramic restorations. The motivation came from clinical observations of inconsistent color matching. The researchers proposed to test two thicknesses with multiple cement types. They sought to quantify color differences using ΔE values. The study focused on feldspathic ceramics, a common restorative material. The goal was to determine if cement shade and thickness interact predictably. The findings could guide material selection for improved esthetics.

The study used 70 ceramic discs in two thicknesses (0.5 and 0.8 mm). Each disc was paired with a composite substrate (1 mm thick). The ceramic and composite were polished and conditioned. Three cement types were used: Variolink Esthetic, RelyX Veneer, and G-aenial Flow. A spectrophotometer measured color differences (ΔE). A two-way ANOVA analyzed the data with Bonferroni corrections. The ceramic thickness and cement type were the independent variables. The dependent variable was the ΔE value. The experiment controlled for other variables like shade and preparation.

Variolink Neutral showed the highest ΔE (15.12 ± 0.71), indicating significant color change. RelyX Veneer A3 had the lowest ΔE (1.59 ± 0.33), suggesting minimal change. No significant difference was found for 0.5 vs. 0.8 mm thickness with Variolink Light (p = 0.230). Similarly, RelyX B0.5 showed no difference (p = 0.318). G-aenial Flow A2 had moderate ΔE values. The cement shade had a greater impact than ceramic thickness. The study found that cement choice is a key factor in esthetic outcomes. These results suggest that material selection should consider cement shade.

The authors propose that cement shade significantly affects ceramic color outcomes. They suggest that clinicians should consider cement shade when selecting materials. The study found no significant difference between ceramic thicknesses for certain cements. This implies that thickness may not always be the dominant factor. The findings may help reduce esthetic unpredictability in restorations. The authors suggest that cement choice is a critical variable in ceramic restorations. They propose that further research could explore other cement types and thicknesses. The study supports the need for careful material selection in clinical settings.