Spectrophotometric evaluation of restorative composite shades and their match with a classical shade guide

Objectives: The aim of this study was to verify the match between 5 shades of composites from different manufacturers with a shade guide and among the systems using a portable spectrophotometer. Materials and Methods: Shade measurements were performed on specimens of Z350 XT (3M ESPE), Charisma Diamond (Heraeus Kulzer GmbH), Esthet X-HD (Dentsply Caulk), and Empress Direct (Ivoclar-Vivadent) for shades A1, A2, A3, B1, and C3 using a Vita Easyshade spectrophotometer (Vita Zahnfabrik) against a white background. Corresponding shades of Vitapan Classical (Vita Zahnfabrik) guide were measured likewise and shade variation (.E) was calculated based on International Commission on Illumination L*a*b* parameters. The Delta E of the composites in each shade was compared by one-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post hoc test (alpha = 0.05). Results: All composites presented Delta E > 3.7 compared with the shade guide. Variation in shades A3, B1, and C3 was significantly different for all composites. Delta E of Z350 XT was significantly lower for A1 than for the other shades, whereas Delta E of Z350 XT and Charisma Diamond were significantly lower for A2 than for the other shades. Conclusions: No composite shade matched with the shade guide. Equivalent shades of the restorative composite from different manufacturers may show clinically noticeable.E.