RESUMO
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Materials possessing fluorescent properties are assumed to emit sufficient visible light to change tooth color under daylight illumination. Fluorescent and nonfluorescent glaze pastes are available to finish the surface of a pressed lithium disilicate restoration. However, the effect of a fluorescent-glaze layer on the final color of the restoration remains unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the color dimensions of lithium disilicate glass-ceramic with different thicknesses and different surface treatments under daylight (D65) illumination conditions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 pressed lithium disilicate glass-ceramic disks were fabricated with 4 different thicknesses: 0.7, 1.2, 1.7, and 2.2 mm. In each thickness, 3 different subgroups were created based on the surface treatment performed (n=10): polished (NG), clear glaze (CG), and fluorescent glaze (FG). For the NG group, disks were polished with 180-, 320-, 600-, 800-, and 1400-grit SiC papers and a polishing machine. For the glazed groups, the CG and FG groups, the specimens were polished with 180-grit SiC papers and the same polishing machine. After the polishing sequence, the final thickness was verified in all groups by using digital calipers (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 mm). Additionally, 20 µL of clear glaze or fluorescent glaze was applied on the CG and FL groups by using an electronic positive displacement repeating pipette. The glaze layer was crystallized in a furnace according to the manufacturer recommendations. Color measurements in the CIELab coordinates were made with a spectrometer coupled to an integrating sphere and a standardized photography gray card as a background. Color difference (ΔE) values were calculated by using the CIE76 and CIEDE2000 formulas. The Shapiro-Wilk test revealed that the data were normally distributed. Two-way ANOVA and the Bonferroni test for multiple comparisons were used to analyze the data (α=.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found among the groups for the L∗, a∗, and b∗ values for the different ceramic thicknesses and surface finishing treatments evaluated (P<.001), except for the b∗ value between the FG and CG groups (P=.988). The L∗ value on the polished group was significantly higher than that on the glazed specimens, followed by the fluorescent-glazed and then by the clear-glazed specimens (P<.001). The ΔE values using the CIE76 formula varied from 0.87 to 2.76 among specimen groups and from 0.32 to 2.34 using the CIEDE2000 among the tested groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ceramic thickness and surface finishing treatment affected all color dimensions (L∗, a∗, and b∗ values) of lithium disilicate ceramic under daylight conditions. These differences resulted in a perceptible but acceptable color mismatch. The value (L∗ color dimension) of the lithium disilicate ceramic was higher on fluorescent-glazed than on not-fluorescent-glazed specimens.