Influence of shade, curing mode, and aging on the color stability of resin cements

The color stability of resin cements is essential for aesthetic restorations. Aim: To evaluate the influence of shade and aging time on the color stability of two light-cured and two dual-cured resin cements. Methods: The CIE-Lab color parameters (n=6) were measured immediately after sample preparation and at 7, 30 and 90 days of aging in distilled water. The color difference (ΔE) was calculated and then analyzed by three-way ANOVA for repeated measures and Tukey’s HSD test (α=0.05). Results: ΔE was higher for transparent resin colors, followed by dark and light colors. The mean values of ΔE were lower for both light-cured resin cements compared to the dual-cured cements. As the aging time increased, ΔE values increased. Conclusions: The light-cured resin cements showed greater color stability. The lighter shades of luting were more likely to display a greater color change.

Clinical evaluation of two materials in the restoration of abfraction lesions

Aim: To evaluate the clinical performance of a composite resin (CR) and a resin-modified glassionomer cement (RMGIC) for the treatment of abfraction lesions. Methods: Thirty patients with abfraction lesions in at least two premolar teeth were selected and invited to participate in this study. All restorations were made within the same clinical time frame. One tooth was restored with CR Z100TM (3M, St. Paul, MN, USA), and the other was restored with RMGIC VitremerTM (3M). The restorations were assessed immediately and 1, 6 and 12 months after the restoration, using modified US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria: marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, wear, retention, secondary caries and hypersensitivity. The statistical analysis was based on Friedman ANOVA test and Mann-Whitney test, considering p<0.05 for statistical significance. Results: Both materials demonstrated satisfactory clinical performance after one year. In the individual analysis of each material, there was a significant difference (p<0.05) in the criteria marginal integrity and wear, for both CR and RMGIC. RMGIC exhibited more damage one year after the restoration. Comparing both materials, it was found a significant difference only for marginal discoloration, while the RMGIC restorations showed the worst prognosis after a year of evaluation. There was no significant difference in the number of retentions, caries or hypersensitivity between CR and RMGIC. Conclusions: It was concluded that CR exhibited the best clinical performance according to the cost-effectiveness and evaluation criteria used in this study.