IADR Abstract Archives
Color Change of Artificially Demineralized Enamel After Resin Infiltration
Objectives: compare color change after resin infiltration of artificially demineralized enamel lesions of different severity, measured by a clinical spectrophotometer versus polarized digital photography.
Methods: Sixty sound human premolars were collected and randomly divided into 6 groups according to the levels of the study (Demineralization depth: Mild, Moderate, severe and color measurement methods: Clinical spectrophotometer and digital photography).
Each tooth was coated with a coat of clear nail varnish, leaving a 5×5mm2 window on the labial surface. For demineralization, all teeth were immersed in a demineralizing solution with a pH adjusted to 4.4 at 37 °C, time was adjusted according to the level needed. All samples were treated using resin infiltration (ICON®, DMG, Hamburg, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
Color difference measurements was carried out at two time points, (T1) sound, (T2) after resin infiltration. Two instrumental methods were utilized to assess the color difference, first by using a clinical spectrophotometer VITA Easyshade® V (VITA Zahnfabrik, Germany), and the second by using DSLR camera with mounted macro lens ( D7200 Nikon, Japan) images where imported to the adobe photoshop software. Color difference (ΔE00) were calculated using the CIEDE2000 formula between the sound and the resin infiltrated enamel using the measured CIE L*A*B values. Data were collected and statistically analyzed.
Results: Two-way ANOVA showed statistically significant difference for both level of the study (p=0.001). The color change for different demineralization depth showed statistically significant difference between all groups (Mild: 1.49±0.18 < Moderate 2.49±0.46< Severe 6.03±1.01). For the measuring device, clinical spectrophotometer showed statistically significant higher color difference (ΔE) compared to digital photography (3.49±2.20 > 3.20±1.90).
Conclusions: The color difference (ΔE) was found to be acceptable only in the mild demineralized group. Regarding the measurement device, both has been satisfactory, but the digital dental photography is more precise and reproducible compared to the clinical spectrophotometer.
Methods: Sixty sound human premolars were collected and randomly divided into 6 groups according to the levels of the study (Demineralization depth: Mild, Moderate, severe and color measurement methods: Clinical spectrophotometer and digital photography).
Each tooth was coated with a coat of clear nail varnish, leaving a 5×5mm2 window on the labial surface. For demineralization, all teeth were immersed in a demineralizing solution with a pH adjusted to 4.4 at 37 °C, time was adjusted according to the level needed. All samples were treated using resin infiltration (ICON®, DMG, Hamburg, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
Color difference measurements was carried out at two time points, (T1) sound, (T2) after resin infiltration. Two instrumental methods were utilized to assess the color difference, first by using a clinical spectrophotometer VITA Easyshade® V (VITA Zahnfabrik, Germany), and the second by using DSLR camera with mounted macro lens ( D7200 Nikon, Japan) images where imported to the adobe photoshop software. Color difference (ΔE00) were calculated using the CIEDE2000 formula between the sound and the resin infiltrated enamel using the measured CIE L*A*B values. Data were collected and statistically analyzed.
Results: Two-way ANOVA showed statistically significant difference for both level of the study (p=0.001). The color change for different demineralization depth showed statistically significant difference between all groups (Mild: 1.49±0.18 < Moderate 2.49±0.46< Severe 6.03±1.01). For the measuring device, clinical spectrophotometer showed statistically significant higher color difference (ΔE) compared to digital photography (3.49±2.20 > 3.20±1.90).
Conclusions: The color difference (ΔE) was found to be acceptable only in the mild demineralized group. Regarding the measurement device, both has been satisfactory, but the digital dental photography is more precise and reproducible compared to the clinical spectrophotometer.