Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 88, Issue 1 , Pages 4-9, July 2002

Relative translucency of six all-ceramic systems. Part I: Core materials☆1☆2☆3☆4☆5☆6☆7☆8

School of Dentistry and Dows Institute for Dental Research, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa

Abstract 

Statement of Problem. All-ceramic restorations have been advocated for superior esthetics. Various materials have been used to improve ceramic core strength, but it is unclear whether they affect the opacity of all-ceramic systems. Purpose. This study compared the translucency of 6 all-ceramic system core materials at clinically appropriate thicknesses. Material and Methods. Disc specimens 13 mm in diameter and 0.49 ± 0.01 mm in thickness were fabricated from the following materials (n = 5 per group): IPS Empress dentin, IPS Empress 2 dentin, In-Ceram Alumina core, In-Ceram Spinell core, In-Ceram Zirconia core, and Procera AllCeram core. Empress and Empress 2 dentin specimens also were fabricated and tested at a thickness of 0.77 ± 0.02 mm (the manufacturer's recommended core thickness is 0.8 mm). A high-noble metal-ceramic alloy (Porc. 52 SF) served as the control, and Vitadur Alpha opaque dentin was used as a standard. Sample reflectance (ratio of the intensity of reflected light to that of the incident light) was measured with an integrating sphere attached to a spectrophotometer across the visible spectrum (380 to 700 nm); 0-degree illumination and diffuse viewing geometry were used. Contrast ratios were calculated from the luminous reflectance (Y) of the specimens with a black (Yb) and a white (Yw) backing to give Yb/Yw with CIE illuminant D65 and a 2-degree observer function (0.0 = transparent, 1.0 = opaque). One-way analysis of variance and Tukey's multiple-comparison test were used to analyze the data (P<.05). Results. Contrast ratios in order of most translucent to most opaque were as follows: Vitadur Alpha 0.60 ± 0.03, Empress (0.5 mm) 0.64 ± 0.01, In-Ceram Spinell 0.67 ± 0.02, Empress 2 (0.5 mm) 0.68 ± 0.02, Empress (0.8 mm) 0.72 ± 0.01, Procera 0.72 ± 0.01, Empress 2 (0.8 mm) 0.74 ± 0.01, In-Ceram Alumina 0.87 ± 0.01, In-Ceram Zirconia 1.00 ± 0.01, and 52 SF alloy 1.00 ± 0.00. Conclusion. Within the limitations of this study, there was a range of ceramic core translucency at clinically relevant core thicknesses. In order of decreasing translucency, the ranges were Vitadur Alpha dentin (standard) > In-Ceram Spinell > Empress, Procera, Empress 2 > In-Ceram Alumina > In-Ceram Zirconia, 52 SF alloy. (J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:4-9.)

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 15.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

☆1 Reprint requests to: Dr Michael J. Heffernan, 90 Harley St, London W1G 7HS, UNITED KINGDOM, Fax: (44)20-7224-4158, E-mail: mheffernan@ureach.com

☆2 aFormer postgraduate student, Department of Prosthodontics. Private practice, London, England.

☆3 bProfessor and Head, Department of Prosthodontics.

☆4 cAssociate Professor, Department of Family Dentistry.

☆5 dAssistant Professor, Department of Family Dentistry.

☆6 eAssociate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics; Director of Clinical Research, Dows Institute for Dental Research.

☆7 fAssociate Professor, Department of Operative Dentistry.

☆8 This research was completed in partial fulfillment of a Master's degree (MJH) and was sponsored by a 1998-99 American College of Prosthodontists/ESPE Research Fellowship Award in Fixed Prosthodontics, Chicago, Ill.

PII: S0022-3913(02)00040-9

doi:10.1016/S0022-3913(02)00040-9

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Volume 88, Issue 1 , Pages 4-9, July 2002