Correlation of surface texture with the

stainability of ceramics
Pinar Kursoglu, DDS, PhD,a Pelin F. Karagoz Motro, DDS, MSc,b
and Ender Kazazoglu, DDS, PhDc
Faculty of Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Goztepe, Istanbul, Turkey
Statement of problem. Stainability is an important factor in the long-term clinical success of ceramic restorations. Contour
adjustments on restoration surfaces cause differences in ceramic texture that may be affected differently by the staining agent.

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surface texture obtained by different surface treatments relevant to the
stainability of heat-pressed leucite-reinforced ceramic disk-shaped specimens.

Material and methods. Sixty-six ceramic disks (IPS Empress Esthetic) (152 mm) were prepared, glazed, and then assigned
to 6 groups. All disks were abraded with a diamond rotary cutting instrument except group GG (control), which was not
subjected to any procedure.
Group R (rotary diamond cutting instrument) was left untreated after abrasion. Group PB was polished with an abrasive
stone, a round polishing brush, and paste with felt wheels. Group PU was polished with 1.0- to 0.5-mm polishing pastes with
a goat-hair brush. Group PS was polished with abrasive stone, silicon carbide polishers, and polishing paste with polishing
disks. Group GR was reglazed. Surface roughness was measured with a profilometer and evaluated with scanning electron
microscopy. A spectrophotometer was used before and after 12 days of immersion in a coffee solution to assess color
difference. Data were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA, the Tukey honestly significant difference test, and the Pearson rank
correlation tests (a¼.05).

Results. Ra values of groups from highest to lowest were, in order, R, PB, PU, PS, GR, and GG (P<.01). Scanning electron
microscope images and Ra values were compatible. The color difference (DE) values of groups from highest to lowest were, in
order, R, PB, PU, PS, GR, and GG. A positive significant relationship of 65.6% between the Ra and DE values was found
(P<.01).

Conclusions. Ceramic staining may be related to surface texture. The use of appropriate polishing materials with compatible
porcelain may reduce stainability. (J Prosthet Dent 2014;-:---)

Clinical Implications
This study found that surface stainability is correlated with surface
texture. Smooth surfaces, which can be obtained by reglazing or
polishing, are essential to avoid the staining of ceramic restorations.

The increased demand for esthetic Ceramic surfaces are smooth be- a rough surface16 that may result in
ceramic restorations has been attributed cause of the glazing procedure used in discoloration of the restoration and
to their superior optical properties, in- final finishing.5-7 However, the achieve- require reglazing or polishing after
creased translucency, and improved es- ment of acceptable occlusion may re- grinding.17-22 The powder/liquid mixing
thetics.1-3 Strong preferences for esthetic quire adjustment of the restoration with ratios used to produce porcelain slurries
dentistry and biocompatible materials rotary cutting instruments after inser- with layering techniques vary according
have increased the public demand for tion.8-15 Such adjustment can remove to the technician’s experience.23 This
ceramic restorations relative to other the glazed layer, which exposes the pores ratio affects the total porosity.24,25
materials.4 of the ceramic material, producing Pressable materials (IPS Empress;

a
Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics.
b
PhD student, Department of Prosthodontics.
c
Professor, Department of Prosthodontics.

Kursoglu et al
2 Volume - Issue -

Ivoclar Vivadent) have been claimed to (English Abrasives) and a grinding de- with polishing disks (Super-Snap Buff
exhibit less porosity.26,27 In addition, vice (Phoenix Beta). All specimens were Disks; Shofu Inc). The same investi-
pressing effectively eliminates pores in glazed (IPS Empress Universal Glaze gator used all polishing instruments
comparison with pre-pressing ceramic and Stain Liquid; Ivoclar Vivadent) ac- with a slow-speed rotating handpiece
materials.28 cording to the manufacturer’s instruc- (KaVo K5plus; KaVo Dental GmbH) at
An appropriate color combination tions and then divided into 6 groups 10 000 rpm for approximately 20 sec-
and color stability are important clin- (n¼10; Table I). To imitate clinical onds. Specimens in group GR were
ical factors in esthetic dental restora- adjustment, specimens in all groups reglazed (IPS Empress Universal Glaze
tion.5-7 Color differences (DE) can be except GG were abraded with a 30-mm and Stain Liquid; Ivoclar Vivadent).
detected either with the naked eye or diamond rotary cutting instrument Those in group GG were not subjected
with the aid of instruments.29-33 The (Red-ring Komet; Gebr Brasseler GmbH to further treatment after glazing and
use of the Commission Internationale & Co KG) with a high-speed handpiece served as the control group.
de l’Eclairage (CIE) L*a*b* color order at 20 000 rpm under water cooling. All specimens were cleaned with a
system has been reported frequently in Specimens in group R were left steam cleaner (Triton SLA; Bego) under
the dental literature.34-43 Several studies untreated after abrasion with the dia- 0.3-MPa pressure and then placed in an
have examined DE values, but no con- mond rotary cutting instrument. Those ultrasonic cleaner (CD-4800 Digital
sensus on clinically acceptable limits in group PB were polished with an Ultrasonic Cleaner; Jeken) for 180 sec-
has been reached.39,44-49 Many studies abrasive stone (Diagen-Turbo-Grinder; onds. A profilometer (Mahr GmbH)
have evaluated ceramic color and color Bredent), round polishing brush (Abraso- was used to measure Ra in microme-
stability by investigating the effects of Fix, fine; Bredent), and diamond polishing ters. One specimen from each group
repeated firing,50 ceramic aging,51 and paste (Diamant-Polierpaste; Bredent) was coated with gold-palladium alloy
ceramic surface texture52 on color. with felt wheels (Bredent). Specimens and examined by field-emission scan-
However, few have reported the effect in group PU were polished with 1.0-mm ning electron microscopy (SEM) (JSM-
of surface roughness (Ra) on color in and 0.5-mm polishing pastes (Dia- 6335F; JEOL) to evaluate the effects of
heat-pressed, leucite-reinforced ceramic mond Polish Mint; Ultradent Products polishing and glazing the porcelain
materials after exposure to a staining Inc) and a goat-hair brush (Jiffy; surfaces. SEM microphotographs were
solution.17,39,42 Ultradent Products Inc). Those in made at 1000 magnification for vi-
Thus, the purpose of this study was group PS were polished in the fol- sual inspection.
to determine the effects of surface tex- lowing order with an abrasive stone Before and after immersion in a
tures obtained by using various surface (Dura-Green Stone; Shofu Inc), coarse coffee solution, the color parameters of
treatments on the stainability of heat- silicon carbide polisher (CeraMaster, each specimen were measured with a
pressed, leucite-reinforced ceramics. coarse; Shofu Inc), silicon carbide spectrophotometer (CM-2600d; Kon-
The null hypothesis of this study was polisher (CeraMaster; Shofu Inc), and ica Minolta Sensing Inc) according to
that surface roughness is not correlated polishing paste (Ultra II; Shofu Inc) the CIE L*a*b* color order system.
with the stainability of heat-pressed,
leucite-reinforced ceramics.
Table I. Surface treatment materials
MATERIAL AND METHODS Group Name Product Manufacturer

Wax pattern disks (152.0 mm) Group R (rotary diamond Red-ring 30-mm diamond rotary Komet, Gebr Brasseler
were fabricated. They were invested and cutting instrument cutting instrument GmbH & Co KG
group)
heated, and 60 heat-pressed, leucite-
reinforced ceramic disk specimens (IPS Group PB (polishing Diagen-Turbo-Grinder Bredent
group Bredent) Abraso-Fix (fine)
Empress Esthetic ETC1; Ivoclar Viva- Diamant-Polierpaste
dent) were pressed to a thickness of Felt wheels 123
2.0 mm and a core diameter of 15 mm Group PU (polishing Diamond Polish Mint Ultradent Products Inc
in an EP600 press furnace (Ivoclar group Ultradent) Jiffy goat-hair brushes
Vivadent), according to the manufac- Group PS (polishing Dura-Green stones Shofu Inc
turer’s instructions. Disk-shaped speci- group Shofu) CeraMaster coarse
mens were exposed to airborne-particle CeraMaster
abrasion with 50-mm aluminum oxide Ultra II porcelain polishing paste
Super-Snap Buff Disk
at 0.2-MPa pressure.
The surfaces of the specimens were Group GG (glazing group) IPS Empress Universal Glaze and Ivoclar Vivadent
Group GR (reglazing liquid IPS Empress Universal
wet-ground with 220-, 320-, 500-, 600-, group) Stain Liquid
and 800-grit silicon carbide paper
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Kursoglu et al
- 2014 3
The coffee solution was prepared Table II. Mean and SD of surface roughness (Ra) and differences between
according to the manufacturer’s in- groups
structions by using 3.6 g of coffee and
Group Ra ±SD (mm) Difference*
300 mL of hot water (Nescafe Classic;
Nestle Turkiye). The solution was stir- R 1.32 0.15 a
red with a stick for 10 minutes and
PB 1.15 0.09 b
passed through filter paper (Melitta;
PU 0.83 0.02 c
Melitta Haushaltsprodukte GmbH &
Co Kg). In the interval between the PS 0.56 0.02 d
2 color measurements, all specimens GR 0.05 0.02 e
were stored in coffee solution in an GG 0.04 0.00 f
incubator (UM 400; Memmert GmbH) F¼1341.45
at 37 C for 12 days, which is equivalent
to 1 year of coffee consumption.35,36,53 R, rotary diamond cutting instrument group; PB, polishing group Bredent; PU, polishing group
Ultradent; PS, polishing group Shofu; GG, glazing group; GR, reglazing group; SD, standard deviation.
The solution was stirred every 12 1 *Different letters indicate statistically significant difference between groups (P<.01).
hours. After 12 days, the specimens
were washed with tap water and dried
with tissue paper (Selpak; Eczacıbaşı). and paste (Shofu Inc) than with other surfaces, whereas group GG showed the
Software (SpectraMagic 3.1) was used polishing materials. SEM microphoto- least staining and the smoothest
to calculate DE: DE2-1¼[([DL]2 graphs showed that the smoothest surfaces.
þ[Da]2þ[Db]2)½. surfaces were obtained in group GG,
Comparisons among groups were followed by group GR (Figs. 1-6). DISCUSSION
performed with 1-way ANOVA, and the
Tukey honestly significant difference Color differences This in vitro study measured the
(HSD) test was applied to any group stainability of ceramic specimens
that showed a discrepancy. The effects The 1-way ANOVA and the Tukey finished with different polishing tech-
of polishing technique on color varia- HSD test results for the means and niques and glazing after immersion in
tion were evaluated with the Pearson standard deviations of DE values are coffee solution. Based on the results,
rank correlation test. Data were tested shown in Table III (P<.01). From the the null hypothesis that Ra is not
at a¼.05. highest to lowest DE value, the groups correlated with ceramic stainability was
were ordered as follows: R, PB, PU, PS, rejected, because a 65.6% positive sig-
RESULTS GR, and GG. No significant difference nificant correlation was found between
in DE values was observed between the Ra and color difference values.
Surface roughness glazed groups (GG and GR) or among The appropriate finishing of dental
the polished groups (PB, PU, PS; both restorations is important to enhance
The means and standard deviations P>.05). DE values were significantly the esthetics and longevity of restored
of Ra values (in micrometers) and the lower in group GG than in groups teeth. Contour adjustments to various
Tukey HSD test results are shown in R (P<.01), PB (P<.01), PU (P<.01), surfaces, for example, facial or incisal-
Table II. From the highest to lowest Ra and PS (P<.05). No significant differ- occlusal surfaces, disrupt the glazed
value, the groups were ordered as fol- ence was found between group PS and surface. Some studies have found
lows: R, PB, PU, PS, GR, and GG. The group GR (P>.05). These values were that glazing provides sufficient surface
1-way ANOVA results indicated that significantly lower in group GR than in smoothness in ceramic restorations,8,19,20
surface treatment affected Ra (P<.01). groups R (P<.01), PU (P<.05), and and others have demonstrated that
Ra values were highest in group R and PB (P<.05). DE values were signifi- polishing with instruments such as
lower in group PS than in the unglazed cantly lower in group PS than in group diamond rotary instruments and rub-
polished groups (PS and PU; P<.01). R (P<.05). No significant difference ber abrasives can also provide clinically
These values were significantly higher in was observed among groups R, PB, and acceptable smoothness.18,20,22 The re-
group GR than in group GG (P<.01). PU (P>.05). ported disadvantages of firing to reglaze
Adjustment with a diamond rota- The Pearson correlation analysis ceramics after adjustment include the
ry cutting instrument (group R) creat- found a 65.6% positive significant rela- time-consuming nature of the procedure,
ed the roughest surfaces. Polishing tionship between the Ra and DE values resulting color changes, and porcelain
smoothed the scratches left by the (P<.01; Fig. 7). The staining agent devitrification. Thus, the use of different
diamond rotary cutting instrument affected rough surfaces more than abrasive stones, abrasive rubber points,
(groups PB, PU, PS). Smoother surfaces smooth surfaces. Group R showed and pastes has been recommended
were obtained with polishing materials the most staining and the roughest instead of reglazing.8-11,19,21 The use
Kursoglu et al
4 Volume - Issue -

1 Scanning electron microscope microphotograph 2 Scanning electron microscope microphotograph

(1000 magnification of group R, rotary diamond cutting (1000 magnification of group PB, polishing group
instrument group). Bredent).

3 Scanning electron microscope microphotograph 4 Scanning electron microscope microphotograph

(1000 magnification of group PU, polishing group (1000 magnification of group PS, polishing group
Ultradent Products Inc). Shofu Inc).

of polishing kits and systems has also silicon carbide rubber points (Shofu comparison with glazed surfaces.
been recommended to obtain good Inc), and Sof-Lex abrasive disks (3M Specimens that were left untreated after
esthetics.18,20,22 The use of silicon car- ESPE). Sarikaya and Güler13 deter- abrasion with a diamond rotary cutting
bide rubber points produced a better mined the Ra values of 4 porcelain instrument (group R) showed the
surface than the use of polishing paste materials subjected to several surface roughest surfaces, and SEM confirmed
and disks.12,13 treatments. They found that the use of that the diamond rotary cutting in-
Aykent et al14 evaluated the effects polishing kits and disks reduced strument had scratched the surfaces.
of 4 surface treatments on Ra in Vita- roughness more effectively than the The use of polishing materials (groups
blocks Mark II (Vita Zahnfabrik) and application of polishing paste with PB, PU, PS) reduced the severity of
found that the roughest surfaces were disks alone. these scratches; the significantly
produced by abrasion with a diamond The findings of the present study smoother surfaces observed in group PS
rotary cutting instrument, followed indicate that polishing did not achieve can be attributed to the use of 2 silicon
by the application of diamond paste, adequate surface smoothness in carbide rubber points, which increased
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Kursoglu et al
- 2014 5

5 Scanning electron microscope microphotograph 6 Scanning electron microscope microphotograph

(1000 magnification of group GR, reglazing group). (1000 magnification of group GG, glazing group).

Table III. Mean and SD of color changes (DE) and differences between groups polishing time and may be related
Group DE ±SD Difference* directly to the reduction in Ra values.
The higher Ra values in group PS
R 1.55 0.30 a compared with group PU can be
PB 1.37 0.55 a, b attributed to the use of polishing paste
with disks alone, in agreement with the
PU 1.37 0.34 a, b
findings of previous studies.12,13 The
PS 1.01 0.62 b, c
manufacturers’ polishing procedures
GR 0.81 0.30 c, d were followed, and silicon carbide
GG 0.42 0.07 d rubber points was used; thus, the
F¼10.933 higher Ra values in group PB compared
with groups PU and PS were likely due
R, rotary diamond cutting instrument group; PB, polishing group Bredent; PU, polishing group
Ultradent; PS, polishing group Shofu; GG, glazing group; GR, reglazing group; SD, standard to product differences. SEM images
deviation. from the polished groups showed
*Different letters indicate statistically significant difference between groups (P<.05). varying degrees of scratch reduction
that paralleled the Ra values.
Ahmad et al15 reported that the use
of clinical polishing instruments at a
3.000 rotational velocity of 10 000 rpm did
not affect the flexural strength of
2.500 ceramic material, but that polishing at a
higher rotational velocity weakened the
2.000 ceramics in spite of achieving smooth-
ness. In this study, polishing systems
were used at 10 000 rpm to avoid this
1.500
weakening effect.
Measurements obtained with in-
1.000
struments such as spectroradiometers,
spectrophotometers, and colorimeters
0.500
permit the quantitative assessment of
color deviation.29-33,43 In this study, a
0.000 spectrophotometer was used to obtain
0.000 0.500 1.000 1.500 2.000 precise measurements. Although several
7 Pearson correlation analysis of relationship between mean studies have assessed DE values, no
surface roughness and mean color difference. clinically acceptable limit has been
Kursoglu et al
6 Volume - Issue -

established.39 O’Brien49 classifies color were not clinically detectable. The re- different Ra and DE values because
matching tolerance DE values as fol- sults of that study cannot be compared of the differences in the ceramic mate-
lows: 0, perfect; 0.5 to 1, excellent; 1 to with those of the present research rial. Stainability was higher in IPS [Link]
2, good; 2 to 3.5, clinically acceptable; because different solutions were used. Ceram specimens that had been built
and >3.5, mismatch. One study45 Sarikaya and Güler52 investigated up by using a layering technique than
suggested that DE values >0.4 are stainability in 4 porcelain materials in the materials tested in this study.
detectable by the highly trained human subjected to different surface treatments This result can be explained by surface
eye, whereas another study47 stated after immersion in coffee for 48 hours. pore exposure caused by grinding of
that the mean color perceptibility was The highest DE value (2.142) was ob- the layering ceramic (IPS [Link] Ceram),
2.6 DE units. In this study, a difference tained with Ceramco III ceramic mate- which increased stainability. Conversely,
of 2.6 DE units was considered the rial (DeguDent/Dentsply Intl) and the low degree of discoloration in spite
color perceptibility limit, according to surface treatment with polishing paste of a high Ra value observed for the IPS
a previous study.47 Several studies have alone. The lowest DE value (0.912) was Empress Esthetic material in the current
examined the stainability of restorative obtained with glazed Vitablocks Mark study may be attributed to the dense
materials after immersion in a solu- II ceramic material (Vita Zahnfabrik). structure and low porosity of this
tion.34,35,37,39,40,42,52 Many beverages Among the 4 ceramic materials, glazing pressable ceramic material. In spite of
(for example, tea, coffee, and cola) yielded DE values of 0.912 to 1.022, and these differences, the results of the
have been used to evaluate discolor- polishing produced DE values of 1.6 to glazed and reglazed groups in the cur-
ation.35,36,38,42 In this study, coffee was 1.8. Stainability was significantly and rent study and in Motro et al17 were
used because it is commonly consumed markedly greater in polished than in similar, indicating that glazing sealed
in daily life.53 glazed specimens. Compared with those the pores on the ceramic surfaces.
Atay et al42 evaluated the effects of findings, DE values in the polished In the current study, Ra values, but
4 beverages on the color of feldspathic groups (PB, PU, PS) were lower in the not DE values, differed significantly
porcelain subjected to 4 surface treat- present study, and values in group PS between groups PS (polished) and GR
ments. The polished group showed approached those in group GR, which (reglazed). Discoloration was similar
greater stainability compared with the was reglazed. Furthermore, although in these 2 groups because of the
glazed, overglazed, and ion-exchange Sarikaya and Güler52 used a shorter dense structure of heat-pressed, leucite-
groups. The authors also stated that immersion time than in the present reinforced ceramic material. Stainability
the type of solution and immersion study, they obtained higher DE values in both of these groups was lower than
time affected stainability, but differ- in glazed and polished specimens than the color perceptibility limit of 2.6 DE
ences among groups were not signifi- in the corresponding groups in this units47 and within the range of “excel-
cant. In agreement with their findings, study. These discrepancies can be lent,” according to the O’Brien classi-
the polished groups (PB, PU, PS) in the attributed to differences in ceramics and fication.49 These findings indicate that
present study showed greater stain- polishing materials. stainability can be reduced by the use of
ability than did the glazed group (GG). Porosity is undesirable in ceramic polishing materials that are appropriate
Another study34 evaluated the materials and is believed to affect es- for the ceramic material.
stainability of 2 composite resin resto- thetics and longevity.25 Grinding ex- In this study, a single immersion
rations and 1 porcelain restoration af- poses the closed pores on the surface time and staining agent were used in
ter exposure to 4 beverages. Among the of the material, producing a rough all tests. Different solutions and im-
beverages, coffee produced the most surface16 that is susceptible to discol- mersion times have variable effects
staining of porcelain after 1 month oration.17,39,42 Albakry et al28 found on ceramic color44 and stainability.42
(DE¼1.32), but this difference was that the pressing of IPS Empress Further studies should be performed
considered to be visually imperceptible. ceramic (Ivoclar Vivadent), a heat- with a range of solutions and immer-
The results of that study cannot be pressed, leucite-reinforced material, sion times. Also, the lack of profilom-
compared with those of the present effectively eliminated pores; smaller and etry measurement after the abrasion
research because of the differences in fewer pores were found after pressing. of surfaces with rotary cutting in-
immersion time. Thus, with respect to stainability, struments and the lack of applied
Yilmaz et al39 compared color sta- pressable ceramics are more advanta- pressure values while polishing the
bility in polished and glazed porcelain geous than feldspathic ceramics. ceramic disks are limitations of this
materials before and after immersion in Motro et al17 demonstrated that study.
methylene blue. They reported greater Ra affected the stainability of the
color stability in glazed porcelain IPS [Link] Ceram (Ivoclar Vivadent) CONCLUSIONS
materials (DE¼0.10-0.26) than in pol- feldspathic ceramic. Although the au-
ished porcelain materials (DE¼0.48- thors used methods identical to those Within the limitations of this in vitro
0.69), although changes in both groups used in this study, they obtained study, the following conclusions can be

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Kursoglu et al

- 2014 7
drawn. Ra significantly affected the 17. Motro PF, Kursoglu P, Kazazoglu E. Effect 33. Lee YK, Yu B, Lim JI, Lim HN. Perceived color
of different surface treatments on stain- shift of a shade guide according to the
stainability of ceramics. Polishing ma-
ability of ceramics. J Prosthet Dent change of illuminant. J Prosthet Dent
terials from Shofu Inc yielded the best 2012;108:231-7. 2011;105:91-9.
results among the polishing agents 18. Klausner LH, Cartwright CB, Charbeneau GT. 34. Gupta R, Parkash H, Shah N, Jain V.
tested. Overall, none of the disks in the Polished versus autoglazed porcelain A spectrophotometric evaluation of color
surfaces. J Prosthet Dent 1982;47: changes of various tooth colored veneering
pressable ceramic group showed clini- 157-62. materials after exposure to commonly
cally perceptible discoloration. 19. Raimondo RL, Richardson JT, Wiedner B. consumed beverages. J Indian Prosthodont
Polished versus autoglazed dental porcelain. Soc 2005;5:72-8.
J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:553-7. 35. Guler AU, Kurt S, Kulunk T. Effects of various
REFERENCES 20. Goldstein GR, Barnhard BR, Penugonda B. finishing procedures on the staining of pro-
1. Kelly JR, Nishimura I, Campbell SD. Ceramics Profilometer, SEM, and visual assessment of visional restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent
in dentistry: historical roots and current porcelain polishing methods. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93:453-8.
perspectives. J Prosthet Dent 1996;75:18-32. 1991;65:627-34. 36. Guler AU, Yilmaz F, Kulunk T, Guler E,
2. Dietschi D. Layering concepts in anterior 21. Fuzzi M, Zaccheroni Z, Vallania G. Scanning Kurt S. Effects of different drinks on
composite restorations. J Adhes Dent electron microscopy and profilometer stainability of resin composite provisional
2001;3:71-80. evaluation of glazed and polished dental restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent
3. Joiner A. Tooth colour: a review of the liter- porcelain. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9: 2005;94:118-24.
ature. J Dent 2004;32(suppl 1):3-12. 452-8. 37. Ertaş E, Güler AU, Yücel AC, Köprülü H,
4. Leinfelder KF. Porcelain esthetics for the 21st 22. Al-Wahadni A, Martin DM. Glazing and fin- Güler E. Color stability of resin composites
century. J Am Dent Assoc 2000;131:47-51. ishing dental porcelain: a literature review. after immersion in different drinks. Dent
5. Seghi RR, Johnston WM, O’Brien WJ. Per- J Can Dent Assoc 1998;64:580-3. Mater J 2006;25:371-6.
formance assessment of colorimetric devices 23. Fleming GJ, Shaini FJ, Marquis PM. An 38. Ayad NM. Susceptibility of restorative mate-
on dental porcelains. J Dent Res 1989;68: assessment of the influence of mixing rials to staining by common beverages: an
1755-9. induced variability on the bi-axial in vitro study. Eur J Esthet Dent 2007;2:
6. Crispin BJ, Hewlett E, Seghi R. Relative color flexure strength of dentine porcelain 236-47.
stability of ceramic stains subjected to glazing discs and the implications for laboratory 39. Yilmaz C, Korkmaz T, Demirköprülü H,
temperatures. J Prosthet Dent 1991;66:20-3. testing of porcelain specimens. Dent Mater Ergün G, Ozkan Y. Color stability of glazed
7. Heydecke G, Zhang F, Razzoog ME. In vitro color 2000;16:114-9. and polished dental porcelains.
stability of double-layer veneers after accelerated 24. Zhang Y, Griggs JA, Benham AW. Influence of J Prosthodont 2008;17:20-4.
aging. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85:551-7. powder/liquid mixing ratio on porosity and 40. Samra APB, Pereira SK, Delgado LC,
8. Patterson CJ, McLundie AC, Stirrups DR, translucency of dental porcelains. J Prosthet Borges CP. Color stability evaluation of
Taylor WG. Efficacy of a porcelain refinishing Dent 2004;91:128-35. aesthetic restorative materials. Braz Oral Res
system in restoring surface finish after 25. Cheung KC, Darvell BW. Sintering of dental 2008;22:205-10.
grinding with fine and extra-fine diamond porcelain: effect of time and temperature on 41. Yuzugullu B, Celik C, Erkut S, Ozcelik TB. The
burs. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:402-6. appearance and porosity. Dent Mater effects of extraoral porcelain polishing se-
9. Ancowitz S, Torres T, Rostami H. Texturing 2002;18:163-73. quences on surface roughness and color of
and polishing: the final attempt at value 26. Nakamoto H, Sugisawa H, Kawahara K, feldspathic porcelain. Int J Prosthodont
control. Dent Clin North Am 1998;42: Takada H, Kaneko M, Nagamitsu Y, et al. 2009;22:472-5.
607-12. Microstructure of etched IPS Empress heat- 42. Atay A, Karayazgan B, Ozkan Y, Akyil MS.
10. Jefferies SR. Abrasive finishing and polishing pressed ceramics observed by SEM. J Nihon Effect of colored beverages on the color sta-
in restorative dentistry: a state-of-the-art re- Univ Sch Dent 1996;38:31-6. bility of feldspathic porcelain subjected to
view. Dent Clin North Am 2007;51:379-97. 27. Gorman CM, McDevitt WE, Hill RG. Com- various surface treatments. Quintessence Int
11. Wright MD, Masri R, Driscoll CF, parison of two heat-pressed all-ceramic 2009;40:41-8.
Romberg E, Thompson GA, Runyan DA. dental materials. Dent Mater 2000;16: 43. Lim HN, Yu B, Lee YK. Spectroradiometric
Comparison of three systems for the polish- 389-95. and spectrophotometric translucency of
ing of an ultra-low fusing dental porcelain. 28. Albakry M, Guazzato M, Swain MV. ceramic materials. J Prosthet Dent 2010;104:
J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:486-90. Influence of hot pressing on the 239-46.
12. Sarac D, Sarac YS, Yuzbasioglu E, Bal S. The microstructure and fracture toughness of 44. O’Brien WJ, Groh CL, Boenke KM.
effects of porcelain polishing systems on the two pressable dental glass-ceramics. A new, small-color-difference equation
color and surface texture of feldspathic por- J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater for dental shades. J Dent Res 1990;69:
celain. J Prosthet Dent 2006;96:122-8. 2004;71:99-107. 1762-4.
13. Sarikaya I, Güler AU. Effects of different 29. Seghi RR, Johnston WM, O’Brien WJ. Spec- 45. Goldstein GR, Schmitt GW. Repeatability of
polishing techniques on the surface rough- trophotometric analysis of color differences a specially designed intraoral colorimeter.
ness of dental porcelains. J App Oral Sci between porcelain systems. J Prosthet Dent J Prosthet Dent 1993;69:616-9.
2010;18:10-6. 1986;56:35-40. 46. Vichi A, Ferrari M, Davidson CL. Color
14. Aykent F, Yondem I, Ozyesil AG, Gunal SK, 30. Seghi RR. Effects of instrument-measuring and opacity variations in three different
Avunduk MC, Ozkan S. Effect of different geometry on colorimetric assessments of resin-based composite products after
finishing techniques for restorative materials dental porcelains. J Dent Res 1990;69: water aging. Dent Mater J 2004;20:
on surface roughness and bacterial adhesion. 1180-3. 530-4.
J Prosthet Dent 2010;103:221-7. 31. Okubo SR, Kanawati A, Richards MW, 47. Douglas RD, Steinhauer TJ, Wee AG.
15. Ahmad R, Morgano SM, Wu BM, Childress S. Evaluation of visual and instru- Intraoral determination of the tolerance
Giordano RA. An evaluation of the effects of ment shade matching. J Prosthet Dent of dentists for perceptibility and acceptability
handpiece speed, abrasive characteristics, 1998;80:642-8. of shade mismatch. J Prosthet Dent 2007;
and polishing load on the flexural strength of 32. Paul SJ, Peter A, Rodoni L, Pietrobon N. 97:200-8.
polished ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94: Conventional visual vs spectrophotometric 48. Imirzalioglu P, Karacaer O, Yilmaz B, Ozmen
421-9. shade taking for porcelain-fused-to- Msc I. Color stability of denture acrylic
16. Van Noort R. Introduction to dental metal crowns: a clinical comparison. Int J resins and a soft lining material against tea,
materials. 4th ed. Edinburgh: Mosby; Periodontics Restorative Dent 2004;24: coffee, and nicotine. J Prosthodont 2010;19:
2013. p. 191-7. 222-31. 118-24.

Kursoglu et al
8 Volume - Issue -

49. O’Brien WJ. Dental materials and their se- 52. Sarikaya I, Güler AU. Effects of different Corresponding author:
lection. 4th ed. Chicago: Quintessence Pub- surface treatments on the color stability Dr Pinar Kursoglu
lishing Co Inc; 2009. p. 28-9. of various dental porcelains. J Dent Sci Yeditepe University, Faculty of Dentistry
50. Yilmaz B, Ozçelik TB, Wee AG. Effect of 2011;6:65-71. Bagdat Cad. No. 238 Goztepe
repeated firings on the color of opaque por- 53. Odioso LL, Gibb RD, Gerlach RW. 34728 Istanbul
celain applied on different dental alloys. Impact of demographic, behavioral, and TURKEY
J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:395-404. dental care utilization parameters on E-mail: [Link]@[Link]
51. Atay A, Oruç S, Ozen J, Sipahi C. Effect of tooth color and personal satisfaction.
accelerated aging on the color stability of Compend Contin Educ Dent 2000; Copyright ª 2014 by the Editorial Council for
feldspathic ceramic treated with various 21:35-41. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
surface treatments. Quintessence Int 2008;
39:603-9.

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Kursoglu et al