AI Summary & Key Takeaways
AI InsightThe repolishing decreased the discoloration of all three materials.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
Abstract
Purpose To comparatively assess the color stability of indirect composite block, nanohybrid, and microhybrid resin composites after immersion in red wine and repolishing. Materials and Methods Specimens (2x7x12 mm) were prepared using an indirect composite block (Cerasmart), a nanohybrid (Ceram X), and a microhybrid (Charisma Smart) resin composite. The specimens’ color was recorded based on the CIE L*a*b* system in a spectrophotometer (Spectroshade). After recording the initial color, the specimens were immersed in red wine for 3 hours per day for 15 days. The color measurement was done again. The specimens were repolished with a multistep polishing system (SuperSnap). The color was measured for the third time. The color change values (ΔE) were calculated with the L*, a*, and b* coordinates obtained at baseline, after the immersion procedure, and after repolishing. Statistical analyses were performed with one-way ANOVA, Tukey’s post hoc, and paired t-tests (p=0.05). Results The composite block presented the lowest ΔE value (p<0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the ΔE values of the nanohybrid and microhybrid resin composites. The repolishing promoted a decrease in the color change of all three materials (p<0.05). The ΔE value of the composite block was clinically acceptable after repolishing. Conclusion The composite block showed higher color stability. The staining resistance of the nanohybrid and microhybrid resin composites was not different. The repolishing decreased the discoloration of all three materials.