Method: Twenty-eight ceramic disks of different thickness (0.8,1 mm) were fabricated as cores according to the manufacturer’s recommendations and divided into groups (n=7). Each was veneered with its compatible veneer ceramic with a different thickness (0.2, 0.4 mm). The groups were named as according to core names (Group IPS e.max Press [A], Group IPS Empress Esthetic [B]), and numbers were given according to thickness combination: 1=(1.00+0.2); 2=(0.8+0.4). All surfaces were measured by profilometry and thicknesses were measured by digital caliper to ensure consistency within the groups. Masking abilities of the specimens were determined by measuring the color difference (ΔE) over white and black backgrounds by using spectrophotometry.
Result: A one-sample t test was performed to determine thickness consistency, and one-way analysis was performed to ensure surface roughness consistency within the groups (p>0.05). One-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD test revealed significant differences among the ΔE values of the ceramic groups (p<0.01). ΔE values from lowest to highest are in order: A2, A1 < B1, B2. There is no significant difference between A2 and A1 also between B1 and B2 however, significant difference was found between A and B groups.
Conclusion: Masking ability are affected by the type of ceramic. A groups showed higher masking ability than B groups whereas they have similar translucency intra groups. Ceramic type should be preferred according to clinical situation.