Influence of surface roughness on the color of dental-resin composites

Influence of surface roughness on the color of dental-resin composites 1 first-author 1 1 2 3 1 3 corresp ‡Corresponding Author ‡Corresponding Author †E-mail:mmperez@ugr.es †E-mail:mmperez@ugr.es mmperez@ugr.es Department of Optics, Faculty of Science, University of Granada, Campus Fuentenueva s/n 18071, Granada, Spain Department of Optics, Faculty of Science, University of Granada, Campus Fuentenueva s/n 18071, Granada, Spain Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Odontology, University of Granada, Campus de Cartuja s/n 18071, Granada, Spain Department of Stomatology, Faculty of Odontology, University of Granada, Campus de Cartuja s/n 18071, Granada, Spain Houston Center for Biomaterials and Biomimetics & Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials, University of Texas Dental Branch at Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA Houston Center for Biomaterials and Biomimetics & Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials, University of Texas Dental Branch at Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA This study deals with the influence of surface roughness on the color of resin composites. Ten resin composites (microfilled, hybrid, and microhybrid) were each polished with 500-grit, 1 200-grit, 2 000-grit, and 4 000-grit SiC papers. The roughness parameter ( R a ) was measured using a Plμ confocal microscope, and field-emission scanning electron microscope (Fe-SEM) images were used to investigate filler morphology. Color was measured using a spectroradiometer and a D65 standard illuminant (geometry diffuse/0° specular component excluded (SCE) mode). Surface roughness decreased with grit number and was not influenced by filler size or size distribution. A significant influence of R a on lightness ( L * ) was found. Lightness increased with decreases in roughness, except for specimens that underwent polishing procedure 4 (PP4; 500-grit, 1 200-grit, 2 000-grit, and 4 000-grit SiC papers consecutively). Generally, it was found that surface roughness influenced the color of resin composites. The composites that underwent PP1 (500-grit SiC paper) exhibited significant differences in chroma ( C * ), hue ( h °), and lightness ( L * ) compared to composites that underwent PP3 (500-grit, 1 200-grit, and 2 000-grit SiC papers consecutively) and PP4. Color difference (∆ E * ) between the polishing procedures was within acceptability thresholds in dentistry. Color measurement Dental resin composites Roughness Introduction 1 One of the most challenging tasks related to rising aesthetic demands in dentistry is to achieve a restoration that matches the color and appearance of a natural tooth. Often, dental restorations are replaced because of a color mismatch. More than 80% of patients are reportedly aware of color differences between the restored and the adjacent natural teeth (Joiner, 2004 2004 ). Tooth-colored resin composites are widely used as restorative materials. These heterogeneous materials are composed of three major constituents: resin matrix (generally methacrylates), filler particles (generally silica), and silane coupling (Phillips, 1993 1993 ). The surface properties of these materials are critical for their success because they mediate the interaction of restorative materials with the oral environment. Light-cured resin composites need to be polymerized in order to achieve adequate mechanical properties. The resin composite should be polished after polymerization because rough, unpolished restoration increases the coefficient of friction and may increase the rate of wear (Krejci et al., 1999 1999 ). In addition, a smooth surface can reduce plaque retention, thereby minimizing possible gingival irritation, surface staining, patient discomfort, and secondary caries (Chan et al., 1980 1980 ; Strassler and Bauman, 1993 1993 ). After polymerization, the resin matrix and filler particles have different levels of hardness that cause variations in polishing efficiency. This variability can lead to differences in surface roughness. Because of composition diversity, various resin composites exhibit different levels of surface roughness after polishing. Materials with fillers of larger sizes generally show more surface roughness than those with fillers of smaller sizes (Tjan and Chan, 1989 1989 ; Yap et al., 1997 1997 ). During the last few decades, the development of resin composites has included the designing of inorganic fillers with smaller particles. According to the filler particle size, universal resin composites are classified as hybrids, microhybrids, and microfills (Dos Santos et al., 2008 2008 ; Lim et al., 2008 2008 ). Recent studies have shown that the particle size and distribution of the inorganic filler can influence the optical properties of the material (Dos Santos et al., 2008 2008 ; Lee, 2008 2008 ; Lim et al., 2008 2008 ). The color of an object depends on its surface spectral reflectance. The reflectance of a surface is a sensitive function of its roughness (Bennett and Porteus, 1961 1961 ), and therefore the optical properties of the dental-resin composites may be influenced by the surface changes occurring during restorative procedures of finishing and polishing (Chung, 1994 1994 ). Color changes and notable gloss changes of dental-resin composites that occur between finishing and polishing, under routine clinical practice, have been clearly established in the literature (Stanford et al., 1985 1985 ; Lee et al., 2002 2002 ; Reis et al., 2003 2003 ; Paravina et al., 2004 2004 ) using mechanical devices (tactile profilometers) to measure the surface roughness. However, these devices are limited by the spatial dimension of the stylus, the measuring force, the sampling rate, and the calibration on the Z -axis (Wennerberg et al., 1996 1996 ). Recent publications have emphasized the importance of three dimensional (3D) surface topography in scientific applications since surface topography is 3D by nature (Al-Shammery et al., 2007 2007 ; Kakaboura et al., 2007 2007 ). In contrast to tactile or optical profilometry techniques, this method can scan the surface, and these surface areas can also be directly visualized in 3D topographical image (Al-Shammery et al., 2007 2007 ). The roughness parameter ( R a ) usually employed in dentistry can be calculated from profiles of these 3D topographies (Gadelmawla et al., 2002 2002 ). Lee et al. ( 2002 2002 ) evaluated the surface roughness after polishing with 600 to 1 500-grit SiC papers using a spectrophotometer, which can operate with the specular component excluded (SCE) and specular component included (SCI) geometries, illuminating/measuring conditions Commission Internationale de l′Eclairage (CIE) diffuse/8°, and CIE standard illuminant A. It was found that CIE lightness values ( L * ) changed after polishing, while the two other color coordinates ( a * and b * ) did not change significantly. From this study, Lee et al. ( 2002 2002 ) concluded that color-measuring geometry influenced the measurement of resin composites with different surface roughnesses. Recognition of color by an observer is a combined physical and psychophysical phenomenon. Therefore, changes in color or in color coordinates are recognized differently depending on the viewing and illuminating conditions. The above-mentioned geometry and illuminating conditions are used in color measurements of dental-resin composites, but they differ from those usually used in visual assessment experiments, which normally require a viewing cabinet using the CIE D65 standard illuminant. Other illuminating/viewing geometries recommended by CIE ( 2004 2004 ) for the reflection measurement of color (e.g., diffuse/0° and diffuse/45°) are more adequate for visual assessment experiments. The use of a spectroradiometer to measure and assess color is a non-contact and objective method that has been used in dentistry (Hasegawa et al., 2000 2000 ; Reno et al., 2001 2001 ; Martin-de las Heras et al., 2003 2003 ; Luo et al., 2009 2009 ) since it can measure colors in a way that matches the geometry of the visual assessments, with low discrepancies between measurement and assessment. Recently, Lim et al. ( 2010 2010 ) found significant correlations between the spectrophotometric and the spectroradiometric values of a * , b * and chroma for all-ceramic materials. However, no correlations were found for lightness and, generally, they concluded that color coordinates measured by spectrophotometer differ significantly from those measured by spectroradiometer. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the influence of surface roughness on the color of the universal dental-resin composites using the diffuse/0° illuminating/measuring geometry, to determine the color differences caused by the varied surface conditions of dental-resin composites, and to compare these differences with the acceptability and perceptibility thresholds in dentistry. Materials and methods 1 Resin composite samples 2 The resin composites used in this study are listed in Table 1 1 . They have the same polymeric matrix, methacrylates (bis-GMA: bisphenol A diglycidylether methacrylate; bis-EMA: bisphenol A polyethylene glycol dietherdimethacrylate; UDMA: urethane dimethacrylate; TEGDMA: triethylene glycol dimethacrylate), and the same filler particle type (zirconia/silica). However, the filler particle size range and size distribution were different: microfilled, microhybrid, and hybrid resin composites were evaluated. Bis-GMA: bisphenol A diglycidylether methacrylate; TEGDMA: triethylene glycol dimethacrylate; UDMA: urethane dimethacrylate Material (Shade) Particle size (type) Filler type Filler content (%) Organic matrix Batch No. Manufacturer Filtek A110 (B1) 0.01–0.09 µm (microfilled) Colloidal silica 40 (v/v) Bis-GMA, TEGDMA 0AH 3M Dental Products, St. Paul, MN, USA Helio Molar (A3) 0.04–0.20 µm (microfilled) Silicondioxide, ytterbium trifluoride 76.5 (w/w), 64 (v/v) Bis-GMA, UDMA, Decanodiol-Dma D52398 Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein Artemis (Super Clear) 0.04–3.00 µm (hybrid) Barium glass, Ba-Al-fluorosilicate glass 75–77 (w/w), 55–58 (v/v) Bis-GMA, UDMA, TEGDMA F34461 Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein Tetric Ceram (C3) 0.04–3.00 µm (hybrid) Barium glass, Ba-Al-fluorosilicate glass 81 (w/w), 63 (v/v) Bis-GMA, UDMA, TEGDMA C06318 Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein Tetric (A1) 0.04–3.00 µm (microhybrid) Barium glass, ytterbium trifluoride 82 (w/w), 62 (v/v) Bis-GMA, UDMA C09835 Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein InTen-S (A3) 0.20–7.00 µm (microhybrid) Barium glass, ytterbium trifluoride 74 (w/w), 51 (v/v) Bis-GMA, UDMA E43412 Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein Synergy Nano (A2/B2) 0.04–2.50 µm (hybrid) Strontium glass, amorphous silica 74 (w/w), 59 (v/v) Bis-GMA, TEGDMA IG271 Coltene-Whaledent AG, Altstatenn, Switzerland Synergy Duo (A1/D2) 0.04–2.90 µm (hybrid) Barium glass, amorphous silica 77 (w/w), 58 (v/v) Bis-GMA, TEGDMA CE013 Coltene-Whaledent AG, Altstatenn, Switzerland Miris Dentin (Shade 4) 0.02–2.50 µm (microhybrid) Barium glass, amorphous silica 80 (w/w), 65 (v/v) Bis-GMA, TEGDMA NB205 Coltene-Whaledent AG, Altstatenn, Switzerland Miris Enamel (Neutral) 0.02–2.50 µm (microhybrid) Barium glass, amorphous silica 80 (w/w), 65 (v/v) Bis-GMA, TEGDMA NB205 Coltene-Whaledent AG, Altstatenn, Switzerland The filler size, content, distribution, and composition might influence the surface roughness of the resin composites. To exactly ascertain these characteristics of the dental-resin composites studied, we obtained images of inorganic fillers of the three different types of restorative materials (microfilled, microhybrid, and hybrid). Previously, we separated the organic and inorganic matrixes of each sample by dissolution in pro-analysi acetone (ACS, ISO, 14.100; Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). Then, the inorganic matrix was mixed in an ultrasound agitator and centrifuged for 30 min at 3000 r/min. Finally, the samples were dried at 37 °C for 12 h and placed in the ultrasonic agitator to reduce particle agglomeration (Willems et al., 1992 1992 ). Next, the samples were coated with gold (Polaron E-5000, Polaron-Equipment, Watford, UK) and screened under field-emission scanning electron microscope (Fe-SEM; LEO Gemini, Germany). The filler particle size and particle-size distribution were determined via digital image analysis (Ghinea et al., 2008 2008 ). Specimen fabrication 2 Each resin composite was packed into a polyethylene mold (5 mm in diameter and 4 mm in thickness) over a slide cover. Materials were handled according to the manufacturer’s instructions. After packing the composite, another slide cover was pressed on top of the specimen. Each specimen underwent light polymerization for 40 s, using a light-curing unit (Spectrum 800, Dentsply/Caulk, Spain) with an irradiance of 400 mW/cm 2 , according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Different levels of roughness were achieved by applying four different polishing procedures to each material as in a previous work (Lee et al., 2002 2002 ), where samples were polished against a sheet of SiC paper for 50 strokes of 15 cm length under constant irrigation. The polishing procedures applied in our work were polishing procedure 1 (PP1, 500-grit SiC paper), PP2 (500- and 1 200-grit SiC papers consecutively), PP3 (500-, 1 200-, and 2 000-grit SiC papers consecutively), and PP4 (500-, 1 200-, 2 000-, and 4 000-grit SiC papers consecutively), as shown in Fig. 1 1 . Twelve specimens were prepared for each material (three specimens for each polishing procedure). To reduce the variability, specimen fabrication, finishing, and polishing were performed by the same user. Although each manufacturer recommends a specific polishing system for most of the materials, we applied the same polishing system to all the materials to avoid any difference that might be caused by different polishing systems (Paravina et al., 2004 2004 ). Roughness and color measurements 2 The R a parameter of each specimen was measured using a Plμ confocal imaging profiler microscope (Sensofar-Tech 2003; Barcelona, Spain), which used SensoScan software at 100× magnification. The image size was 762 pixels×560 pixels, corresponding to an area of 139 μm×102 μm. Topographies were obtained with the following parameters: symmetrical Z with 0.2-μm resolution in height, and X and Y with 0.18 μm each. The mean roughness was calculated from three measurements. Color was measured using a spectroradiometer (SpectraScan PR-704, Photo Research; Chatsworth, USA) with high measurement repeatability and standard deviation (SD) of repeated measurements over a 15-min period less than 0.1% (Pérez et al., 2000 2000 ). For the color measurement, the samples were positioned in the center of a color-assessment cabinet (CAC portable, Verivide Limited, Leicester, England) and illuminated using a source simulating the relative spectral irradiance of CIE standard illuminant D65. The illuminating/viewing configuration (CIE, 2004 2004 ) was CIE diffuse/0° (SCE) while the CIE 1931 2° standard observer was used. The spectroradiometer was placed at 30 cm, a distance that allowed measurements of the whole surface of the specimen, and the aperture field of measurement was 1°. Measurements were repeated thrice. The L * , a * and b * values for all the samples were calculated, but it is often desirable to express color specification in terms of correlates of the perceived L * , chroma ( C * ), and hue ( h °): $${C^*} = {[{({a^*})^2} + {({b^*})^2}]^{1/2}}$$ , $$h^\circ = \arctan (b^*/a^*)$$ . Values of the three polished specimens were averaged to establish a single set of values for each resin composite. Color differences ( $$\Delta E_{ab}^*$$ ) were calculated with CIELAB color-difference formula (CIE, 2004 2004 ): $$\Delta E_{ab}^* = {[{(\Delta {L^*})^2} + {(\Delta {C^*})^2} + {(\Delta {H^*})^2}]^{1/2}}$$ , where $$\Delta {H^*} = 2{(C_1^* \cdot C_0^*)^{1/2}} \cdot \sin (\Delta {h^ \circ }/2)$$ . Since the value distribution was normal ( P > 0.05) and it was always the same sample that passed through the different polishing procedures, we made a t -test for paired samples between each pair of polishing procedures in order to examine the overall effects of the polishing procedure on the roughness and color (significant differences for P ≤0.05). One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) ( P ≤0.05) and Tukey’s multiple-comparison test were used to compare the R a values among the three different groups of resin composites (hybrid, microhybrid, microfilled) for all polishing procedures. All statistical analyses were performed using a standard statistical software package (SPSS 15.0.1, Chicago, USA). Results and discussion 1 As mentioned above, filler size, content, distribution, and composition can influence the surface roughness of a resin composite (Lim et al., 2008 2008 ). According to manufacturers (Table 1 1 ), all restorative materials evaluated in this study had similar polymer matrix and different filler particle-size distributions: microfills, hybrids, and microhybrids. Fig. 2 2 shows the Fe-SEM images of the filler particles with their corresponding particle-size distributions for representative dental-resin composites of each group examined (microfilled, microhybrid, and hybrid). From the analyses of the relative and cumulative frequencies of the filler particle size, we found that the microfilled dental-resin composites contained small particles (ranging from 0.01 to 1.40 μm with 96% of the total particles smaller than 1.00 μm), but with a well-balanced distribution (a maximum relative frequency of 26% for 0.50 μm). The filler particle size of the microhybrid composites was within the interval of 0.01–3.80 μm, but with less than 90% of the particles smaller than 1.00 μm, while the hybrid resins had larger particles (ranging from 0.01 to 4.00 μm) with more than 10% of the particles larger than 2.00 μm. As reflected in Fig. 2 2 , the particle-size distribution differed for each type of composite and this is important to take into account when assessing differences in surface roughness and in color coordinates between different polishing procedures. Surface-roughness changes caused by different polishing procedures are shown in Fig. 3 3 . Although these polishing methods are not usually used in clinical practice, the use of these methods enables us to achieve a wide range of roughness values so that we could establish the effects of this parameter on the color of resin composites, the main objective of this study. The representation of R a values for all the polishing procedures revealed lower R a values with higher grit numbers (Fig. 4 4 ). The interval of the R a values for PP1 was wide, ranging from 0.12 to 0.29 μm. This range narrowed as the grit number increased, showing similar roughness for all materials evaluated ( R a close to 0.05 μm) after the PP4. These results are similar to the values of R a found in a previous study (Lee et al., 2002 2002 ) on hybrid dental-resin composites, which employed a polishing system (wet SiC papers; 600-1 000-1 500 grits) similar to the one used in this work. However, Hosoya et al. ( 2010 2010 ), using SiC polishing papers and a laser scanning microscope for evaluating surface roughness, obtained, for hybrid resin composites, R a values ranging from 4.56 μm (1 000-grit) to 6.24 μm (180-grit). This large difference from our results could be due to the experimental measuring device and to the filler size (0.2–100.0 μm, average 0.7 μm) of the studied composites. Some resin composites showed slight rises in R a values from PP1 to PP2. This result might be due to the polishing procedures, which removed some parts of the material, including areas of damage caused by the polishing itself, since the SiC paper had a coarser grain. The statistical analysis indicated no significant differences ( P > 0.05) for the R a values among the three different groups of resin composites (microfilled, hybrid, and microhybrid) for any of the polishing procedures applied (especially PP2, PP3, and PP4). This implies that the surface roughness value of resin composites after polishing is not influenced by filler size or distribution. Other types of composites, such as nanocomposites, may behave differently, since the filler particle-size range is very narrow (Mitra et al., 2003 2003 ). The above mentioned, along with these reached results, suggest the need to perform future research to answer these questions. Previous works showed that the polishing system significantly affected the R a values (Reis et al., 2002 2002 ; Nagem Filho et al., 2003 2003 ; Sarac et al., 2006 2006 ). Korkmaz et al. ( 2008 2008 ) compared the effects of four different polishing systems on a microhybrid resin composite, and found R a values ranging from 0.05 μm (using Mylar Strip) to 0.20 µm (using PoGo, Dentsply/Caulk, Milford, DE, USA). Sarac et al. ( 2006 2006 ) found that R a values were included within the 0.46–1.30 μm interval when they evaluated the surface roughness of a microhybrid resin composite after polishing with polishing wheels and polishing discs. Nagem Filho et al. ( 2003 2003 ) showed R a values ranging from 0.39 to 0.61 µm when evaluating roughnesses of seven dental-resin composites after finishing with a polyester matrix strip and aluminium oxide disks. Although the above mentioned studies used different types of polishing systems (commercial polishing systems), the values obtained for the roughness parameter R a are comparable with values of the same parameter in our work (Fig. 4 4 ). L * , C * , and h ° values of specimens for each polishing procedure are listed in Tables 2 2 – 4 4 . In Fig. 5 5 the L * values are plotted for the four polishing procedures. For the evaluated dental-resin composites, L * increased slightly from PP1 to PP3, while R a decreased, and there was a small decrease in L * values from PP3 to PP4. 2 Material 2 Polishing procedure 2 R a (μm) 2 L * 2 C * 2 h ° Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 4 Filtek A110 PP1 0.133 0.03 73.14 0.41 6.95 0.04 69.88 0.02 PP2 0.152 0.07 73.88 0.18 7.20 <0.01 68.86 0.02 PP3 0.052 <0.01 74.68 0.32 7.72 <0.01 65.81 0.02 PP4 0.041 0.01 74.63 0.58 6.70 <0.01 66.57 <0.01 4 Helio Molar PP1 0.180 0.05 68.86 0.19 17.22 <0.01 74.43 <0.01 PP2 0.110 0.01 69.00 0.41 18.01 <0.01 73.15 0.03 PP3 0.077 0.02 70.61 0.72 17.37 <0.01 73.49 <0.01 PP4 0.038 0.01 69.56 0.36 18.34 <0.01 73.63 <0.01 2 Material 2 Polishing procedure 2 R a (μm) 2 L * 2 C * 2 h ° Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 4 Miris Dentin PP1 0.136 0.02 61.10 0.70 22.51 0.06 75.37 0.02 PP2 0.142 0.03 61.88 0.42 21.88 0.05 75.30 <0.01 PP3 0.094 0.02 63.53 0.31 22.05 <0.01 75.95 0.01 PP4 0.042 <0.01 62.03 0.51 22.64 0.06 75.69 0.08 4 Miris Enamel PP1 0.125 0.02 63.18 0.19 18.77 0.05 65.42 0.01 PP2 0.086 0.01 63.76 0.25 20.07 <0.01 66.06 0.01 PP3 0.058 <0.01 64.97 0.13 19.78 0.05 65.98 0.01 PP4 0.038 <0.01 65.51 0.75 21.90 <0.01 64.23 0.01 4 InTen-S PP1 0.186 0.05 64.66 0.15 20.15 <0.01 70.43 <0.01 PP2 0.188 0.03 65.36 0.41 21.06 0.05 68.90 0.01 PP3 0.074 0.01 66.36 0.50 19.86 1.08 71.99 0.01 PP4 0.052 0.04 65.55 0.12 21.42 0.05 71.12 0.02 4 Tetric PP1 0.171 0.01 65.82 0.41 19.36 <0.01 70.21 <0.01 PP2 0.180 0.08 66.93 0.63 17.21 <0.01 69.56 <0.01 PP3 0.114 0.03 68.11 0.12 19.27 <0.01 68.25 0.01 PP4 0.057 0.04 66.22 0.74 20.40 0.05 66.86 <0.01 2 Material 2 Polishing procedure 2 R a (μm) 2 L * 2 C * 2 h ° Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 4 Artemis PP1 0.285 0.08 58.37 0.51 23.03 <0.01 79.65 <0.01 PP2 0.117 0.01 60.09 0.55 23.39 <0.01 77.89 <0.01 PP3 0.074 <0.01 60.46 0.55 23.33 <0.01 74.20 <0.01 PP4 0.049 0.01 59.32 0.27 27.01 <0.01 77.18 <0.01 4 Synergy Duo PP1 0.146 0.04 64.16 0.35 15.33 0.05 72.79 0.02 PP2 0.138 0.02 64.42 0.32 15.53 <0.01 70.11 <0.01 PP3 0.050 0.01 64.71 0.30 14.89 0.05 69.11 0.02 PP4 0.053 <0.01 65.30 0.19 16.91 0.05 69.29 0.01 4 Synergy Nano PP1 0.145 0.01 63.56 0.31 18.26 0.05 72.09 <0.01 PP2 0.115 <0.01 63.32 0.41 18.89 0.05 71.71 <0.01 PP3 0.071 0.01 63.96 0.28 19.67 0.06 71.43 0.02 PP4 0.047 0.01 62.05 0.08 18.60 0.18 71.32 0.01 4 Tetric Ceram PP1 0.231 0.09 60.57 0.19 17.99 0.06 74.58 0.01 PP2 0.162 0.11 60.40 0.66 17.21 <0.01 74.43 <0.01 PP3 0.067 0.03 61.62 0.40 19.92 0.06 74.59 0.01 PP4 0.046 0.02 60.68 0.16 20.60 0.01 71.85 0.01 One explanation for this finding might be that a SiC paper of high grit number resulted in over-polishing that could damage not only the inorganic filler but also the organic matrix of the composite, thereby making the surface look darker. The behavior found for very smooth SiC paper has not been reported earlier, since previous studies (Lee et al., 2002 2002 ; Paravina et al., 2004 2004 ) have not evaluated polishing procedures with SiC papers finer than 1 500 grits. In the present study, no clear trends of chroma and hue were related to roughness. There was an increase in C * values with the decrease of roughness (except for Filtek A110 and Synergy Nano), regardless of the filler particle size. This increase was not linear and was material-dependent (Tables 2 2 – 4 4 ). The most pronounced change in chroma was registered for Artemis Super Clear, Miris Enamel, Synergy Duo, and InTen-S, between PP3 and PP4 (2 000 to 4 000 grits). For Tetric, the highest variation occurred between PP1 and PP2, while for Tetric Ceram the highest variation was registered between PP2 and PP3. For Helio Molar and Miris Dentin, there were no significant changes between any of the polishing procedures. We found no clear trend in the variation of the hue angle associated with roughness. Table 5 5 lists the probability values from the t -test of related samples (comparing each of the polishing procedures) for the R a , L * , C * , and h ° parameters. The R a registered significant differences ( P < 0.05) between all the polishing procedures. In the case of lightness ( L * ), statistically significant differences were found between all the polishing procedures, except between PP2 and PP4. As indicated earlier, this might have occurred due to the decrease in lightness of resin composites caused by the over polishing in PP4. 2 Polishing procedure 4 P value R a L * C * h ° PP1 vs. PP2 0.002 <0.001 0.627 <0.001 PP1 vs. PP3 <0.001 <0.001 0.006 0.002 PP1 vs. PP4 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 PP2 vs. PP3 <0.001 <0.001 0.127 0.137 PP2 vs. PP4 <0.001 0.261 <0.001 0.006 PP3 vs. PP4 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.275 With respect to chroma ( C * ), significant differences were found between all the polishing procedures except PP1-PP2 and PP2-PP3. For the hue angle ( h °), there were significant differences between PP1 and all the other procedures, while for PP2-PP3 and PP3-PP4, no significant differences were detected. According to our results, using diffuse/0° illuminating/measuring geometry, the surface roughness can generally influence the color of the resin composites. Resin composites that underwent PP1 (smaller grit, higher roughness) presented significant differences in chroma, hue angle, and lightness when compared to the ones subjected to PP3 and PP4 (higher grit, lower roughness). Table 6 6 shows the CIELAB color differences ( $$\Delta E_{ab}^*$$ ) registered between the different polishing procedures for each dental-resin composite studied. It is more convenient to present the $$\Delta E_{ab}^*$$ color difference values since in almost all available literature, the acceptability/perceptibility thresholds are expressed in $$\Delta E_{ab}^*$$ units. Color differences ( $$\Delta E_{ab}^*$$ ) ranged from 0.42 to 2.86. Unexpectedly, the color difference values did not increase with greater grit differences. For example, the dental-resin composite Miris Dentin presented the greatest color difference $$(\Delta E_{{\text{ab}}}^* = 2.10)$$ between PP1 and PP3 and not between PP1 and PP4 $$(\Delta E_{{\text{ab}}}^* = 0.81)$$ , as expected. Only for Miris Enamel and Synergy Duo, the greatest color difference was found between PP1 and PP4. The decrease in lightness found between PP3 and PP4 might explain the higher values of color difference recorded between not-so-different polishing procedures. 3 Polishing procedure 10 $$\Delta E_{ab}^*$$ 2 Microfilled 4 Microhybrid 4 Hybrid Filtek A110 Helio Molar InTen-S Miris Dentin Miris Enamel Tetric Synergy Nano Synergy Duo Tetric Ceram Artemis PP1 vs. PP2 0.62 0.68 0.97 0.74 0.87 1.50 0.43 0.90 0.47 1.69 PP1 vs. PP3 1.53 1.40 1.52 2.10 1.59 1.97 0.90 1.23 1.39 2.86 PP1 vs. PP4 1.22 0.90 1.01 0.81 2.63 1.43 1.32 1.83 1.81 2.32 PP2 vs. PP3 0.94 1.31 1.59 1.43 1.02 1.61 0.70 0.52 1.83 1.50 PP2 vs. PP4 0.73 0.50 0.86 0.42 1.90 2.19 1.09 1.16 2.18 1.86 PP3 vs. PP4 0.86 0.98 1.12 1.31 1.42 1.73 1.71 1.30 1.38 2.31 Data on acceptability and perceptibility thresholds in the dental literature are somewhat arbitrary (Lindsey and Wee, 2007 2007 ). A study by Kuehni and Marcus ( 1979 1979 ) is frequently cited as a standard for the perceptibility threshold of dental color differences. In this study, $$\Delta E_{{\text{ab}}}^* = 1.00$$ was found to be the 50:50% perceptibility threshold. Ruyter et al. ( 1987 1987 ) studying color-difference acceptability, reported that 50% of their observers considered a pair of dental-resin composite samples to be unacceptable at $$\Delta E_{{\text{ab}}}^* = 3.30$$ . Ragain and Johnston ( 2000 2000 ) also examined the color difference acceptability for dental restorative materials, and found that the mean 50:50% acceptability threshold was $$\Delta E_{{\text{ab}}}^* = 2.72$$ . Ishikawa-Nagai et al. ( 2009 2009 ), investigating all-ceramic crowns, found that $$\Delta E_{{\text{ab}}}^* = 1.60$$ units represented a color difference that could not be detected by the human eye. Recently, Ghinea et al. ( 2010 2010 ) using the same color measurement protocol as in this study (a spectroradiometer and diffuse/0° geometry) and an advanced Takagi-Sugeno-Kang fuzzy approximation for the threshold calculation procedure, established $$\Delta E_{{\text{ab}}}^* = 3.48$$ units as a new 50:50% acceptability threshold and $$\Delta E_{{\text{ab}}}^* = 1.80$$ units as a new 50:50% perceptibility threshold for dentistry. Recent studies reported that the CIEDE2000 color difference formula (Δ E 00 ) provided a better fit than the CIELAB formula in the evaluation of color difference and color thresholds (Pérez et al., 2007 2007 ; Ghinea et al., 2010 2010 ). Notwithstanding the possible beneficial use of this improved formula, most of the papers recently published in the dental literature still refer to $$\Delta E_{ab}^*$$ . This is probably due to the relative complexity of the Δ E 00 formula, as well as to the ease of comparison with earlier studies. According to our results, polishing-dependent differences in the color of resin composites were within the acceptability threshold (Ghinea et al., 2010 2010 ) for all composites and for all comparisons involving any of the polishing procedures. In some cases, especially for color differences between PP1 and PP2 for the same material, the values were even below the perceptibility threshold. Conclusions 1 Within the limitations of this study, the surface roughness levels found after applying different polishing procedures influenced the color of the resin composites. Color differences between polishing procedures were within the acceptability thresholds for dental restorative materials. However, the color differences between specimens of the same material polished with different procedures were higher than the perceptibility thresholds, being more pronounced when the materials underwent polishing procedures involving SiC paper with higher grit numbers. References H Al-Shammery , N Bubb , C Yougson , D Fasbinder , D Wood . The use of confocal microscopy to assess surface roughness of two milled CAD-CAM ceramics following two polishing techniques . Dent Mater , 2007 . 23 ( 6 ): 736 - 741 . 16914192 DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.012 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.012 . The use of confocal microscopy to assess surface roughness of two milled CAD-CAM ceramics following two polishing techniques HE Bennett , JO Porteus . Relation between surface roughness and specular reflectance at normal incidence . J Opt Soc Am , 1961 . 51 ( 2 ): 123 - 129 . DOI: 10.1364/JOSA.51.000123 http://doi.org/10.1364/JOSA.51.000123 . Relation between surface roughness and specular reflectance at normal incidence KC Chan , JL Fuller , AA Hormati . The ability of foods to stain two composite resins . J Prosthet Dent , 1980 . 43 ( 5 ): 542 - 545 . 6928958 DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(80)90328-5 http://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(80)90328-5 . The ability of foods to stain two composite resins KH Chung . Effects of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface texture of resin composites . Dent Mater , 1994 . 10 ( 5 ): 325 - 330 . 7498594 DOI: 10.1016/0109-5641(94)90041-8 http://doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(94)90041-8 . Effects of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface texture of resin composites CIE (Commission Internationale de l′Eclairage) Technical Report: Colorimetry , 2004 . : Vienna, Austria CIE Central Bureau , CIE Pub. No. 15.3 . Technical Report: Colorimetry GB Dos Santos , RV Monte Alto , HR Sampaio Filho , EM Da Silva , CE Fellows . Light transmission on dental resin composites . Dent Mater , 2008 . 24 ( 5 ): 571 - 576 . 17689605 DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2007.06.015 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.06.015 . Light transmission on dental resin composites ES Gadelmawla , MM Koura , TMA Maksoud , IM Elewa , HH Soliman . Roughness Parameters . J Mater Process Technol , 2002 . 123 ( 1 ): 133 - 145 . DOI: 10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00060-2 http://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00060-2 . Roughness Parameters R Ghinea , L Ugarte-Alvan , AM Ionescu , 等 . Influence of the Size and Distribution of Filler Particles on the Colour of Resin Composites . Proceedings of the IS&T’s Fourth European Conference on Color in Graphics, Imaging, and Vision (CGIV) , 2008 . : Terassa, Spain . Influence of the Size and Distribution of Filler Particles on the Colour of Resin Composites R Ghinea , MM Perez , LJ Herrera , MJ Rivas , A Yebra , RD Paravina . Color difference thresholds in dental ceramics . J Dent , 2010 . 38 ( Suppl. 2 ): e57 - e64 . 20670670 DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2010.07.008 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2010.07.008 . Color difference thresholds in dental ceramics A Hasegawa , A Motonomi , I Ikeda , S Kawaguchi . Color of natural tooth crown in Japanese people . J Color Res Appl , 2000 . 25 ( 1 ): 43 - 48 . DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6378(200002)25:1<43::AID-COL6>3.0.CO;2-P http://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6378(200002)25:1<43::AID-COL6>3.0.CO;2-P . Color of natural tooth crown in Japanese people Y Hosoya , T Shiraishi , T Odatsu , T Ogata , M Miyazaki , JM Powers . Effects of specular component and polishing on color of resin composites . J Oral Sci , 2010 . 52 ( 4 ): 599 - 607 . 21206163 DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.52.599 http://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.52.599 . Effects of specular component and polishing on color of resin composites S Ishikawa-Nagai , A Yoshida , M Sakai , J Kristiansen . Clinical evaluation of perceptibility of color differences between natural teeth and all-ceramic crowns . J Dent , 2009 . 37 ( Suppl. 1 ): e57 - e63 . 19423209 DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2009.04.004 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.04.004 . Clinical evaluation of perceptibility of color differences between natural teeth and all-ceramic crowns A Joiner . Tooth colour: a review of the literature . J Dent , 2004 . 32 ( Suppl. 1 ): 3 - 12 . 14738829 DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2003.10.013 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2003.10.013 . Tooth colour: a review of the literature A Kakaboura , M Fragouli , C Rahiotis , N Silikas . Evaluation of surface characteristics of dental composites using profilometry, scanning electron, atomic force microscopy and gloss-meter . J Mat Sci Mater Med , 2007 . 18 ( 1 ): 155 - 163 . DOI: 10.1007/s10856-006-0675-8 http://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-006-0675-8 . Evaluation of surface characteristics of dental composites using profilometry, scanning electron, atomic force microscopy and gloss-meter Y Korkmaz , E Ozel , N Attar , G Aksoy . The influence of one-step polishing systems on the surface roughness and microhardness of nanocomposites . Oper Dent , 2008 . 33 ( 1 ): 44 - 50 . 18335732 DOI: 10.2341/07-28 http://doi.org/10.2341/07-28 . The influence of one-step polishing systems on the surface roughness and microhardness of nanocomposites I Krejci , F Lutz , R Boretti . Resin composite polishing: filling the gaps . Quintessence Int , 1999 . 30 ( 7 ): 490 - 495 . 10635262 . Resin composite polishing: filling the gaps RG Kuehni , RT Marcus . An experiment in visual scaling of small color differences . Color Res Appl , 1979 . 4 ( 2 ): 83 - 91 . . An experiment in visual scaling of small color differences YK Lee . Influence of filler on the difference between the transmitted and reflect colors of experimental resin composites . Dent Mater , 2008 . 24 ( 9 ): 1243 - 1247 . 18343494 DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2008.01.014 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.01.014 . Influence of filler on the difference between the transmitted and reflect colors of experimental resin composites YK Lee , BS Lim , CW Kim . Effect of surface conditions on the color of dental resin composites . J Biomed Mater Res , 2002 . 63 ( 5 ): 657 - 663 . 12209913 DOI: 10.1002/jbm.10383 http://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.10383 . Effect of surface conditions on the color of dental resin composites HN Lim , B Yu , JI Lim , YK Lee . Correlations between spectroradiometric and spectrophotometric colors of all-ceramic materials . Dent Mater , 2010 . 26 ( 11 ): 1052 - 1058 . 20684978 DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2010.07.005 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.07.005 . Correlations between spectroradiometric and spectrophotometric colors of all-ceramic materials YK Lim , YK Lee , BS Lim , SH Rhee , HC Yang . Influence of filler distribution on the color parameters of experimental resin composites . Dent Mater , 2008 . 24 ( 1 ): 67 - 73 . 17420043 DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2007.02.007 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.02.007 . Influence of filler distribution on the color parameters of experimental resin composites DT Lindsey , AG Wee . Perceptibility and acceptability of CIELAB color differences in computer-simulated teeth . J Dent , 2007 . 35 ( 7 ): 593 - 599 . 17517460 DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2007.03.006 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2007.03.006 . Perceptibility and acceptability of CIELAB color differences in computer-simulated teeth W Luo , S Westland , R Ellwood , I Pretty , V Cheung . Development of a whiteness index for dentistry . J Dent , 2009 . 37 ( 1 ): e21 - e26 . 19501446 DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2009.05.011 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2009.05.011 . Development of a whiteness index for dentistry S Martin-de las Heras , A Valenzuela , R Bellini , C Salas , M Rubino , JA Garcia . Objective measurement of dental color for age estimation by spectroradiometry . Forensic Sci Int , 2003 . 132 ( 1 ): 57 - 62 . 12689752 DOI: 10.1016/S0379-0738(02)00454-1 http://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(02)00454-1 . Objective measurement of dental color for age estimation by spectroradiometry SB Mitra , D Wu , BN Holmes . An application of nanotechnology in advanced dental materials . J Am Dent Assoc , 2003 . 134 ( 10 ): 1382 - 1390 . 14620019 . An application of nanotechnology in advanced dental materials H Nagem Filho , MTF Soares D′Azevedo , HD Nagem , FP Marsola . Surface roughness of composite resins after finishing and polishing . Braz Dent J , 2003 . 14 ( 1 ): 37 - 41 . 12656463 DOI: 10.1590/S0103-64402003000100007 http://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402003000100007 . Surface roughness of composite resins after finishing and polishing RD Paravina , L Roeder , H Lu , K Vogel , JM Powers . Effect of finishing and polishing procedures on surface roughness, gloss and color of resin-based composites . Am J Dent , 2004 . 17 ( 4 ): 262 - 266 . 15478488 . Effect of finishing and polishing procedures on surface roughness, gloss and color of resin-based composites MM Pérez , M Melgosa , A El Moraghi , E Hita . Usefulness of cathode ray tube color displays in chromaticity-discrimination experiments . Appl Opt , 2000 . 39 ( 22 ): 4021 - 4030 . DOI: 10.1364/AO.39.004021 http://doi.org/10.1364/AO.39.004021 . Usefulness of cathode ray tube color displays in chromaticity-discrimination experiments MM Pérez , A Saleh , A Yebra , R Pulgar . Study of the variation between CIELAB Δ E * and CIEDE2000 color-differences of resin composites . Dent Mater J , 2007 . 26 ( 1 ): 21 - 28 . DOI: 10.4012/dmj.26.21 http://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.26.21 . Study of the variation between CIELAB ΔE* and CIEDE2000 color-differences of resin composites RW Phillips . Skinner Science of Dental Materials , 1993 . 9th Ed : Mexico McGraw-Hill Interamericana , (in Spanish) . Skinner Science of Dental Materials JC Ragain , WM Johnston . Color acceptance of direct dental restorative materials by human observers . Color Res Appl , 2000 . 25 ( 4 ): 278 - 285 . DOI: 10.1002/1520-6378(200008)25:4<278::AID-COL8>3.0.CO;2-F http://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6378(200008)25:4<278::AID-COL8>3.0.CO;2-F . Color acceptance of direct dental restorative materials by human observers AF Reis , M Giannini , JB Lovadino , CT Santos Dias . The effect of six polishing systems on the surface roughness of two packable resin-based composites . Am J Dent , 2002 . 15 ( 3 ): 193 - 197 . 12469758 . The effect of six polishing systems on the surface roughness of two packable resin-based composites AF Reis , M Giannini , JR Lovadino , GM Ambrosano . Effects of various finishing systems on the surface roughness and staining susceptibility of packable composite resins . Dent Mater , 2003 . 19 ( 1 ): 12 - 18 . 12498891 DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(02)00014-3 http://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(02)00014-3 . Effects of various finishing systems on the surface roughness and staining susceptibility of packable composite resins EA Reno , CL Poore , MK Anastasia , 等 . Reproducibility of Non-Contact Tooth Color Measurement System . 2001 . Proceedings of 30th Annual Meeting of the AADR . Chicago, IL 1365 . Reproducibility of Non-Contact Tooth Color Measurement System IE Ruyter , K Niler , B Moller . Color stability of dental composite materials for crowns and bridge veneers . Dent Mater , 1987 . 3 ( 5 ): 246 - 251 . 3479360 DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(87)80081-7 http://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(87)80081-7 . Color stability of dental composite materials for crowns and bridge veneers D Sarac , YS Sarac , S Kulunk , C Ural , T Kulunk . The effect of polishing techniques on the surface roughness and color change of composite resins . J Prosthet Dent , 2006 . 96 ( 1 ): 33 - 40 . 16872928 DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.04.012 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.04.012 . The effect of polishing techniques on the surface roughness and color change of composite resins WB Stanford , PL Fan , WT Wozniak , JW Stanford . Effect of finishing on color and gloss of composites with different fillers . J Am Dent Assoc , 1985 . 110 ( 2 ): 211 - 213 . 3856601 . Effect of finishing on color and gloss of composites with different fillers HE Strassler , G Bauman . Current concepts in polishing composite resins . Practical Periodontics Aesthet Dent , 1993 . 5 ( 3 Suppl. 1 ): 12 - 17 . . Current concepts in polishing composite resins AH Tjan , CA Chan . The polishability of posterior composites . J Prosthet Dent , 1989 . 61 ( 2 ): 138 - 146 . 2715944 DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89)90361-2 http://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90361-2 . The polishability of posterior composites A Wennerberg , R Ohlsson , BG Rosen , B Andersson . Characterizing three-dimensional topography of engineering and biomaterials surface by confocal laser scanning and stylus technique . Med Eng Phys , 1996 . 18 ( 7 ): 548 - 556 . 8892239 DOI: 10.1016/1350-4533(95)00005-4 http://doi.org/10.1016/1350-4533(95)00005-4 . Characterizing three-dimensional topography of engineering and biomaterials surface by confocal laser scanning and stylus technique G Willems , P Lambrechts , M Braem , JP Celis , G Vanherle . A classification of dental composites according to their morphological and mechanical characteristics . Dent Mater , 1992 . 8 ( 5 ): 310 - 319 . 1303373 DOI: 10.1016/0109-5641(92)90106-M http://doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(92)90106-M . A classification of dental composites according to their morphological and mechanical characteristics AU Yap , KW Lye , CW Sau . Surface characteristics of tooth-colored restoratives polished utilizing different polishing systems . Oper Dent , 1997 . 22 ( 6 ): 260 - 265 . 9610323 . Surface characteristics of tooth-colored restoratives polished utilizing different polishing systems We thank Mr. David NESBITT for translating the text into English. 10.1631/jzus.B1000374 Project (No. MAT2009-09795) supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation 2010-10-26 2011-05-30 2011-04-06 2022-01-05 Copyright © Zhejiang University and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011 2011 Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE B (Biomedicine and Biotechnology) 07 12