Ricerc@Sapienza

BACKGROUND: The aim of this in vivo study was to compare
spectrophotometric backgrounds - white (WB) with
cuspal (C), black (BB) with non cuspal (NC) - in order to
determine if the oral natural conditions could be used as reliable
backgrounds instead of the traditional black and/or white
for in vivo color matching.
Methods: Spectrophotometric measurements were performed
on ninety-three upper right permanent central incisor.
Among inclusion criteria were A1, A2, A3 (Vita Classical
scale) tooth shade. Each tooth was measured on black, white,
cuspal and non cuspal backgrounds. ΔE between black and
non cuspal (ΔEBBNC) and ΔE between white and cuspal
(ΔEWBC) were calculated and correlated to human eye color
perception (AT, PT). Opalescence (O) and contrast ratio (CR)
were calculated on the four different backgrounds.
Results: The comparison between black and oral cavity
natural backgrounds shows high clinical acceptability:
98.9% in the central, 96.8% in the gingival and 92.4% in the
incisal tooth area. Clinical acceptability between white and
oral cuspal backgrounds was 90.3% in the gingival, 79.6% in
the central and 7.6% in the incisal tooth area.
CONCLUSIONS: Natural oral black background can always
be used instead of the artificial one, while the natural bright
oral background can be used instead of the artificial one only
for an overall tooth shade matching.Our results support the
natural backgrounds as valid alternatives to artificial ones.
Using individual oral features as referral points, sustain personalized
practices and provide a sustainable and easy clinical
procedure.