RESUMO
Background: Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) resin ceramics allow easier milling than glass ceramics but are suspected to be more stainable. Although Photoshop® is widely used for picture analysis, its potential for shade selection has not been properly assessed. Aim: Purpose primary: To evaluate the color stability of three CAD/CAM resin ceramics and Lithium Disilicate. Secondary: to compare the color evaluation between a spectrophotometer (Vita Easyshade compact) and Photoshop software. Materials and Methods: Three CAD/CAM resin ceramic materials (n = 10) and a fourth group of lithium disilicate were used. Half of each group were thermocycled (5°C and 55°C; 3000 cycles). All samples were immersed in colored beverages (coffee, tea and red wine) for 30 days. Values were obtained by spectrophotometry and photographs analyzed using Photoshop software. The parameters measured were CIEL*a*b, and the color difference (ΔE) was analyzed. A mixed model test was used to compare the results through time and materials (α = 0.05). The comparison between the spectrophotometer and Photoshop results was performed using the bivariate Pearson's correlation test. Results: Lithium disilicate glass ceramic exhibited less color change (ΔE = 14) than resin ceramics (15.7 < ΔE < 18.7). The least change was noted with GC Cerasmart (ΔE = 15.7) followed by Vita Enamic (ΔE = 17*) and Brilliant Crios (ΔE = 18.7*). Spectrophotometer and Photoshop values showed low correlations. Conclusions: Resin ceramics may suffer from color change in clinical use. Photoshop is technique sensitive; pictures are easily affected by the light conditions and camera settings.
RESUMO
AIM: The internal fit and resistance to fracture of resin ceramics are to be evaluated compared to that of lithium disilicate as the control group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four groups of 20 crowns each (GC Cerasmart, Vita Enamic, Coltène Brilliant Crios, and e.max CAD) were cemented on identical metal dies. Marginal gaps were measured before cementation and load to fracture was applied after cementation, half of each group was thermodynamically aged (3,000 cycles of 5° to 55° immersion followed by 200,000 cycles of 100 N load), finally the crowns were loaded until fracture in a universal testing machine. Statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) package 23 was used for statistical work. RESULTS: Marginal gaps ranged between 68.5 ± 23.8 µm and 87 ± 29.1 µm while occlusal gaps ranged from 220.7 ± 33.3 µm to 275.5 ± 46.5 µm and were not significantly different between groups. Fracture loads ranged from 633.8 ± 127.3 N to 1596.4 ± 497.7 N with lithium disilicate glass ceramics (LDGCs) and Enamic having higher values than resin nano-ceramics (RNCs). The fracture resistance was more related to material than aging and gap value. CONCLUSION: The margin adaptation of resin ceramics was comparable to lithium disilicate with no significant difference. Lithium disilicate showed a higher resistance than resin ceramics and there was a higher resistance to fracture for polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network (PICN) than RNCs. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Resin ceramics can have marginal adaptation and fracture resistance within clinical acceptance; therefore, they can be a good chair-side solution achieved in a single appointment session.
