Perceptions of Dental Dyschromia by Patients and Dentist.

PURPOSE: To assess patient self-perception of overall dental appearance and of potentially localized dyschromic teeth and to compare them to the perception of the treating dentist. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A sample of 160 patients from Cluj-Napoca, Romania, answered a questionnaire regarding the self-perception of their dental appearance and of potential localized dental discolorations. The same questions were answered by their dentist, without knowing their answers, after clinical examination of each patient. Each patient and the dentist were asked to indicate a tooth with a pleasant color to be considered as reference. Color measurements of teeth indicated as dyschromic and of the reference teeth were performed using a spectrophotometer. Color differences were calculated using the ΔE00 formula. RESULTS: Tooth color was considered the most disturbing factor of their dental appearance by 41.25% of patients. Most patients (58.12%) acknowledged localized dyschromic teeth in their dental arches. Agreement between patients and dentist regarding the identification of dyschromic teeth was found in 61.87% of cases. The DE00 between the reference teeth and the teeth considered dyschromic by both patients and dentist ranged between 0.8 and 23.1. Disagreement between patients and dentist was found in 38.12% of situations. For teeth considered dyschromic only by patients, the ΔE00 ranged between 0.8 and 23.1. For teeth considered dyschromic only by the dentist, the ΔE00 ranged between 0.8 and 25. CONCLUSION: Most patients expressed concerns regarding their overall dental color and perceived themselves as having teeth with localized dyschromia. More than a third of the investigated patients had different perceptions regarding dyschromic teeth compared to their dentist. The majority of ΔE00 values calculated between dyschromic and reference teeth exceeded the perceptibility and acceptability thresholds.

Color matching of full ceramic versus metal-ceramic crowns - a spectrophotometric study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To verify the color match of metal-ceramic and full ceramic crowns, using instrumental methods. METHODS: A number of 153 teeth (anterior and posterior teeth), in 62 patients, were restored with metal ceramic (MC, n=119), pressed-ceramic (PC, n=28), and zirconia-ceramic (ZC, n=6) full coverage crowns. The shade of a reference natural tooth was recorded instrumentally with a dental spectrophotometer (Vitaeasyshade Advance 4.0) in "single tooth measurement", which provided the base color in Vita Classic (VC) and Vita 3D Master shades (3D).For verifying the outcome of the restoration "verify restoration" mode was used, and ΔE values were recorded for both VC and 3D Master shade guides. Moreover, matching symbols were also recorded (***=good, **=fair, *=poor). Descriptive statistics was performed and data were analyzed (One-sample z-Test, α=0.05) for comparison with visual thresholds in dentistry (Perceptibility Threshold - PT=1.2 and Acceptability Threshold - AT=2.7). RESULTS: The data did not follow a normal distribution (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, p<0.05). Recorded color difference was significantly higher than PT and AT, for all types of restorations, regardless of the coding system (p<0.05). For MC crowns in 2.52% (4.20% for 3D) of the cases the color difference was smaller than PT, in 19.32% (the same for 3D) of cases was between PT and AT, and in 78.15% (76.47% for 3D) of cases was higher than the AT. For PC crowns in 3.57% (0% for 3D) of the cases the color difference was smaller than PT, in 25% (32.14% for 3D) of cases was between PT and AT, and in 71.42% (67.85% for 3D) of cases was higher than the AT. In the case of ZC crowns none of the restorations had color difference smaller than PT, but in 16.66% of cases was between PT and AT, and in 83.33% of cases was higher than the AT, for both VC and 3D. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the study, a better color match was achieved in the case of pressed ceramic crowns, made of lithium disilicate. In most of the situations the color difference between the restoration and the reference tooth exceeded the perceptibility thresholds, but the matching was recorded as "fair" by the spectrophotometer.

Color comparison between non-vital and vital teeth.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to define a color space of non-vital teeth and to compare it with the color space of matched vital teeth, recorded in the same patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a group of 218 patients, with the age range from 17 to 70, the middle third of the buccal surface of 359 devitalized teeth was measured using a clinical spectrophotometer (Vita Easyshade Advance). Lightness (L*), chromatic parameters (a*, b*), chroma (C*), hue angle (h) and the closest Vita shade in Classical and 3D Master codifications were recorded. For each patient, the same data were recorded in a vital reference tooth. The measurements were performed by the same operator with the same spectrophotometer, using a standardized protocol for color evaluation. RESULTS: The color coordinates of non-vital teeth varied as follows: lightness L*: 52.83-92.93, C*: 8.23-58.90, h: 51.20-101.53, a*: -2.53-24.80, b*: 8.10-53.43. For the reference vital teeth, the ranges of color parameters were: L*: 60.90-97.16, C*: 8.43-39.23, h: 75.30-101.13, a*: -2.36-9.60, b*: 8.36-39.23. The color differences between vital and non-vital teeth depended on tooth group, but not on patient age. CONCLUSION: Non-vital teeth had a wider color space than vital ones. Non-vital teeth were darker (decreased lightness), more saturated (increased chroma), and with an increased range of the hue interval. An increased tendency towards positive values on the a* and b* axes suggested redder and yellower non-vital teeth compared to vital ones.