Cargando…

Criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials

The purpose of this review was to suggest practical criteria for the clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials, and to review the translucency with these criteria. For the evaluation of reported translucency values, measuring instrument and method, specimen thickness,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Lee, Yong-Keun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4977345/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27508156
http://dx.doi.org/10.5395/rde.2016.41.3.159
_version_ 1782447011223568384
author Lee, Yong-Keun
author_facet Lee, Yong-Keun
author_sort Lee, Yong-Keun
collection PubMed
description The purpose of this review was to suggest practical criteria for the clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials, and to review the translucency with these criteria. For the evaluation of reported translucency values, measuring instrument and method, specimen thickness, background color, and illumination should be scrutinized. Translucency parameter (TP) of 15 to 19 could be regarded as the translucency of 1 mm thick human enamel. Visual perceptibility threshold for translucency difference in contrast ratio (ΔCR) of 0.07 could be transformed into ΔTP value of 2. Translucency differences between direct and indirect resin composites were perceivable (ΔTP > 2). Universal and corresponding flowable resin composites did not show perceivable translucency differences in most products. Translucency differed significantly by the product within each shade group, and by the shade group within each product. Translucency of human enamel and perceptibility threshold for translucency difference may be used as criteria for the clinical evaluation of translucency of esthetic restorative materials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4977345
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49773452016-08-09 Criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials Lee, Yong-Keun Restor Dent Endod Review Article The purpose of this review was to suggest practical criteria for the clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials, and to review the translucency with these criteria. For the evaluation of reported translucency values, measuring instrument and method, specimen thickness, background color, and illumination should be scrutinized. Translucency parameter (TP) of 15 to 19 could be regarded as the translucency of 1 mm thick human enamel. Visual perceptibility threshold for translucency difference in contrast ratio (ΔCR) of 0.07 could be transformed into ΔTP value of 2. Translucency differences between direct and indirect resin composites were perceivable (ΔTP > 2). Universal and corresponding flowable resin composites did not show perceivable translucency differences in most products. Translucency differed significantly by the product within each shade group, and by the shade group within each product. Translucency of human enamel and perceptibility threshold for translucency difference may be used as criteria for the clinical evaluation of translucency of esthetic restorative materials. The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2016-08 2016-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4977345/ /pubmed/27508156 http://dx.doi.org/10.5395/rde.2016.41.3.159 Text en ©Copyrights 2016. The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Lee, Yong-Keun
Criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials
title Criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials
title_full Criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials
title_fullStr Criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials
title_full_unstemmed Criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials
title_short Criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials
title_sort criteria for clinical translucency evaluation of direct esthetic restorative materials
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4977345/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27508156
http://dx.doi.org/10.5395/rde.2016.41.3.159
work_keys_str_mv AT leeyongkeun criteriaforclinicaltranslucencyevaluationofdirectestheticrestorativematerials