Selecting VITA classical shades with the VITA 3D-master shade guide.

PURPOSE: Although the VITA 3D-Master (3D) shade guide offers improved shade-matching performance, many dental materials are only available in VITA Classical (VC) shades. This study aimed to clarify whether it is possible to convert 3D shades determined by observers into VC shades (indirect method) without adding a clinically significant error in comparison with direct shade determination using the VC shade guide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty ceramic specimens were fabricated. L*a*b* values were recorded using a spectroradiometer. Sixty participants (35 dentists, 15 technicians, and 10 students) were recruited and asked to determine the shades of specimens using the VC and 3D shade guides under standardized conditions. Conversion tables were constructed by allocating the closest VC shade tab to every matched 3D shade and by use of an optimization algorithm (indirect methods). Differences between ΔE values for VC matches and for the indirect methods were evaluated using t tests. RESULTS: A mean ΔE (SD) of 4.34 (2.00) for VC and 4.22 (2.21) for 3D was observed (P = .040). Compared with direct shade matching using VC, the indirect method with the optimized tables resulted in a mean ΔE of 4.32 (1.96), which was not significantly different (P = .586). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, the conversion tables were suitable for the determination of tooth color using the 3D shade guide followed by conversion into VC shades without adding a clinically significant error.

Determination of VITA Classical shades with the 3D-Master shade guide.

OBJECTIVES: Because of its good matching performance the VITA 3D-Master shade guide (3D) is frequently used for determination of tooth color. Numerous composites/ceramics are, however, available in VITA Classical (VC) shades only. The objective of this study was to investigate the possibility of performing a shade match with 3D Master and converting this result via a table in a VC shade (indirect method) without this resulting in an apparent inferior shade matching in comparison with direct shade matching with the VC. METHODS: Experiments were performed with an artificial, computer-generated tooth color space. Conversion tables were generated by calculating the color difference (ΔE) between a 3D shade and the closest VC shade (simple conversion table) and with the aid of optimization procedures. Statistical differences between the direct and indirect methods and between the indirect methods were assessed by use of a U-test. RESULTS: Median ΔE was 2.38 for direct matching with the VC and 2.86 for indirect matching by use of a simple conversion table (p < 0.01). Optimized tables performed slightly better (median ΔE = 2.81). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the study, it is usually possible to determine tooth color with the 3D and convert it, via a table, into a VC shade without adding a clinically apparent error to the direct shade match with the VC.