We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry



Forgotten password?


J Adhes Dent 18 (2016), No. 1     18. Feb. 2016
J Adhes Dent 18 (2016), No. 1  (18.02.2016)

Page 43-50, doi:10.3290/j.jad.a35518, PubMed:26814318

Adhesive Systems as an Alternative Material for Color Masking of White Spot Lesions: Do They Work?
de Lacerda, Ana Júlia Farias / Ávila, Daniele Mara da Silva / Borges, Alessandra Buhler / Pucci, Cesar Rogerio / Torres, Carlos Rocha Gomes
Purpose: To evaluate the color masking effect of infiltration treatment of artificial white spot lesions (AWSL) using a dedicated resin in comparison to different adhesive systems.
Materials and Methods: Enamel/dentin specimens were obtained from bovine incisors and baseline color was assessed using a reflectance spectrophotometer, according to the CIE L*a*b* system. AWSL were produced using a buffered acid solution and a new color evaluation was performed. The specimens were divided into 8 groups: control: artificial saliva changed daily for 7 days; IC: infiltrating resin Icon; EC: EquiaCoat; FU: Futurabond U; SBU: Single Bond U; SBMP: Scotchbond MP; OB: OptibondFL; BF: Bioforty. After the treatments, the color was evaluated again and the values for the parameters ΔL (change in lightness), Δa (change in chroma), Δb (change in hue), and ΔE (general color difference) were calculated in relation to baseline. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests.
Results: After treatment, ANOVA showed significant differences for all parameters (p = 0.001). Tukey's test showed the greatest lightness reduction (ΔL) for the IC group, followed by EC, FU, and SBU. The SBMP, OB, and BF groups were similar to the control. For Δb values, all groups showed differences in relation to the control, with no differences between them. In relation to ΔE, all groups showed differences in relation to the control (ΔE = 5.24), with no significant differences between them. ΔE values after application of all resinous materials were lower than the threshold of 3.7, indicating effective color masking.
Conclusions: The Icon infiltrant produced a greater lightness reduction of white lesions (ΔL). For general color difference (ΔE), all the resinous materials tested were able to color mask artificial AWSL.

Keywords: tooth color, caries infiltration, white spot lesion, minimally invasive dentistry, esthetic dentistry