You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content
Download PDF

Comparative evaluation of color stability in polished and glazed CAD/CAM ceramics subjected to coffee thermal cycling: an in vitro study

BMC Oral Health volume 25, Article number: 531 (2025) Cite this article

Abstract

Background and aims

Optimal color stability is crucial for patient satisfaction in prosthetic dentistry. This study assessed the impact of coffee immersion on the color stability and translucency of polished and glazed lithium disilicate, zirconia, and zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate ceramics.

Materials and methods

This in-vitro study evaluated the color stability and translucency of three CAD-CAM ceramics: lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD), monolithic zirconia (Incoris ZI), and zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate (Vita Suprinity). Ninety specimens (30 per ceramic type) were divided into glazing, polishing, and control groups. After thermal cycling in a coffee solution, color changes (ΔE) and translucency parameters (TP) were measured with a spectrophotometer. ANOVA was used to analyze differences between groups. Post-hoc comparisons were conducted using the Tukey test, with a significance threshold of p < 0.05.

Results

The results showed no significant differences in color changes (ΔE) between the polished, glazed, and control groups after coffee immersion (P = 0.096). Although coffee immersion caused detectable color changes, these were not clinically perceptible (ΔE > 1.01). Translucency (TP) measurements revealed significant differences between the groups (P < 0.001), with monolithic zirconia showing lower translucency compared to the other ceramics.

Conclusion

This in-vitro study showed that coffee immersion negatively impacted the color of all tested CAD-CAM ceramics, although the changes remained within clinically acceptable limits. Surface treatments, including polishing and glazing, had no significant effect on the color stability or translucency of the ceramics. Coffee immersion also did not affect translucency.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Restorations with optimal color and optical properties are a key demand among dental clinic patients [1, 2]. However, one of the significant challenges in prosthetic treatments is the gradual discoloration of restorations [3]. Surface texture and roughness impact restoration color stability and success, with rough surfaces promoting discoloration due to plaque retention and cleaning difficulties [4]. Dentists often need solutions to minimize surface roughness and its potential adverse effects after adjusting to achieve proper contour and occlusion. Glazing and polishing are two effective methods for reducing surface roughness [5,6,7,8,9]. Polishing involves smoothing and creating a glossy surface by abrasion, typically done in-office without laboratory equipment [10]. Glazing is a porcelain firing process that fills surface pores to create a smooth, glossy finish and improves the mechanical strength of ceramic restorations [11]. However, the ideal clinical approach, whether reglazing or polishing after adjusting the glazed surface, remains unclear in the existing literature [8].

Studies have demonstrated that common beverages such as coffee, tea, cola, and fruit juices can cause noticeable color changes in restorative materials [12, 13]. Coffee is a popular beverage worldwide and a primary caffeine source. It is a staple in daily routines. However, few studies have investigated the effect of coffee thermal cycling on lithium disilicate glass ceramics [14].

Lithium disilicate is regarded as the most aesthetically pleasing biomaterial among ceramics due to its exceptional optical properties [15]. However, its main limitations are low fracture resistance and brittleness [16,17,18]. On the other hand, zirconia offers superior fracture resistance but lacks desirable optical properties [15]. To address the need for biomaterials that combine aesthetics and high fracture resistance, zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate was developed [19]. VITA Suprinity (VITA Zahnfabrik) is an example of this material [20], which the manufacturer claims exhibits optical properties comparable to natural teeth [19]. Newer ceramics, including high-translucency zirconia (4Y-TZP, 5Y-TZP), polymer-infiltrated ceramics (Vita Enamic), and advanced lithium silicates (Celtra Duo), have been developed to enhance both esthetic and mechanical properties. High-translucency zirconia improves optical qualities while maintaining strength, polymer-infiltrated ceramics offer better elasticity and fracture resistance, and advanced lithium silicates provide superior translucency and durability compared to conventional lithium disilicate [21].

Lithium disilicate, monolithic zirconia, and zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate are among the most popular restorative materials. While newer ceramics with enhanced optical and mechanical properties have been introduced, these three materials remain widely used in clinical practice. To the best of our knowledge, no study has yet evaluated the combined effects of surface treatments (polishing and glazing) and coffee thermal cycling on the color stability of different zirconia-based materials. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the color stability of polished and glazed specimens of three CAD-CAM ceramics types. It is hypothesized that there is no significant difference in the color stability between polishing and glazing lithium disilicate (LD), monolithic zirconia (Z), and zirconia-reinforced lithium disilicate (ZLS) after coffee thermal cycling.

Materials and methods

This experimental, in-vitro study was conducted from January to December 2023. Based on a similar previous study [22], using Advanced Repeated Measure ANOVA and PASS11 software, with α = 0.05, β = 0.2, effect size = 0.76, and a standard deviation of 0.66, the minimum specimen size for each subgroup was calculated to be ten specimens, considering ceramic type (3 types) and surface treatment method (glazing, polishing, and control). In total, 90 specimens will be divided into nine groups, with ten specimens in each group. The university’s ethical committee approved the study under the ethical code IR.IAU.DENTAL.REC.1399.174.

Preparation of ceramic specimens

The shape and dimensions of the specimens were as follows:

Lithium disilicate zirconia-reinforced blocks (ZLS) (Suprinity, Vita Zahnfabrik, Germany with 10 mm x 10 mm x 1 mm (rectangular) dimensions.

Lithium disilicate blocks (LD) (IPS e.max CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent, Liechtenstein) with dimensions of 10 mm x 10 mm x 1 mm (rectangular).

Monolithic zirconia blanks (Z) (Incoris ZI, Dentsply Sirona, Germany) with dimensions of 13 mm x 13 mm x 1.7 mm (square). All materials were in color A2. The compositions and structures of these materials are detailed in Table 1.

Table 1 Ceramic composition
Full size table

The blocks and blanks were cut using a diamond blade at a speed of 3000 rpm with a Low-Speed Precision Cutting Machine (MECATOM, T 201 A Presi Co, USA) with abundant water spray. After drying with air spray, ZLS and LD blocks underwent crystallization in a furnace (Auto Therm-100, Koushafan Pars, Iran). The Z specimens were sintered in a furnace (InFire HTC Speed, Dentsply Sirona) following the manufacturer’s instructions (Table 2).

Table 2 Firing specifications of ceramics
Full size table

After heat treatment, the dimensions of the specimens remained as follows:

ZLS: 10 mm x 10 mm x 1 mm (rectangular).

LD: 10 mm x 10 mm x 1 mm (rectangular).

Z: 10 mm x 10 mm x 1 mm (rectangular).

The specimens were then randomly divided into three treatment groups:

  1. 1.

    Group 1 (G): Glazed according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Fig. 1).

  2. 2.

    Group 2 (P): Polished using the polishing kit. (Diapol and Diapol Twist kits, EVE Ernst Vetter, Germany) for 15 s with a rotational motion (Fig. 2).

  3. 3.

    Group 3 (C): Remained untreated.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Glazing of the specimens

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

Pre-polishing of the specimens with W16Dmf

Full size image

For Group 1 (G):

  • For LD, a 1:1 layer of Empress Universal Glaze and Glaze Paste (IPS Empress, Ivoclar Vivadent, Liechtenstein) was used.

  • For ZLS, a layer of Glaze Paste (Akzent Plus, Vita, Germany) was applied.

  • For Z, a layer of glaze paste (glaze paste, Zirkonzahn GmbH, Italy) was used.

Glazing parameters

  • For ZLS, a temperature of 800 °C for 5 min with a heating rate of 80 °C per minute and an initial temperature of 400 °C was used.

  • For IZ, a temperature of 960 °C for 2 min with a heating rate of 60 °C per minute and an initial temperature of 500 °C was applied.

  • For LD, a temperature of 820 °C for 4 min with a heating rate of 65 °C per minute and an initial temperature of 390 °C was applied.

For Group 2 (P):

  • The specimens were polished in six stages using the polishing kits (Diapol and Diapol Twist, EVE, Germany) as follows:

    • Stage 1: Smoothing with W16Dg (light blue),

    • Stage 2: Pre-polishing with W16Dmf (pink),

    • Stage 3: High-shine polishing with W16D (white).

  • Then, with the Diapol Twist kit:

    • Stage 1: Smoothing (light blue),

    • Stage 2: Pre-polishing (pink),

    • Stage 3: High-shine polishing (white).

  • The recommended rotational speed was 15,000 rpm for 15 s, with the operator applying controlled hand pressure for each bur.

Initial evaluation of color parameters

Next, the specimens were assessed using a spectrophotometer (X-Rite SP60, X-Rite Inc., USA). The spectrophotometer was positioned 80 cm from the specimen, focusing on a 2.8 mm diameter area at its center for measurement. Two light sources, angled at 45 degrees, were used to illuminate the specimen’s surface. A standard white calibration tile (16176001, Calibration Plate, Japan) was utilized for calibration.

Immersion in coffee thermal cycling

All specimens were subjected to 5000 thermal cycles in a coffee solution. Two chambers were prepared at 5 °C and the other at 55 °C. Each specimen was immersed for 30 s in each chamber, with a 10-second transition between chambers. This thermal cycling protocol simulates 6 months of restoration exposure in the oral environment, as per the literature [23]. The coffee solution was prepared by adding one tablespoon of coffee (Nescafe Classic Refill, Nestlé, Switzerland) to 177 ml of water using a filtered coffee machine, according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The coffee solution in each chamber was replaced every 12 h (Fig.  3). After thermal cycling in coffee, the specimens were cleaned by brushing 10 times in a circular motion with toothpaste (Procter and Gamble, Crest, USA) under water pressure.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Coffee thermal cycling of the specimens with 5000 cycles

Full size image

Secondary evaluation of color parameters

For the secondary color evaluation after thermal cycling, the specimens were placed in the spectrophotometer, and the data were recorded for each specimen using the same method.

The color changes (∆E) were calculated using the CIE Lab system. The values were documented at each stage of color parameter measurement. To calculate ΔE*, the following formula was applied: [24]

$$ \Delta {\rm{E*}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ = }}{\mkern 1mu} \surd [{(\Delta {\rm{L*}})^{\rm{2}}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ + }}{\mkern 1mu} {(\Delta {\rm{a*}})^{\rm{2}}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ + }}{\mkern 1mu} {(\Delta {\rm{b*}})^{\rm{2}}}] $$

L (lightness, from 0 for black to 100 for white), a* (green-red spectrum, with negative values for green and positive values for red), and b* (blue-yellow spectrum, with negative values for blue and positive values for yellow) [25].

Color measurements were conducted under consistent environmental conditions.

To assess the translucency of each specimen, the following formula was used: [24]

$$ {\rm{TP}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ = }}{\mkern 1mu} \surd [{({\rm{LB}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ - }}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{LW}})^{\rm{2}}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ + }}{\mkern 1mu} {({\rm{aB}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ - }}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{aW}})^{\rm{2}}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ + }}{\mkern 1mu} {({\rm{bB}}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{ - }}{\mkern 1mu} {\rm{bW}})^{\rm{2}}}] $$

In this formula, W represents the white background, and B represents the black background.

Two standard backgrounds were used to measure translucency:

A standard black background with parameters: L* = 7.60, a* = 0.45, b* = 2.44.

A standard white background with parameters: L* = 88.83, a* = -4.95, b* = -6.07.

For translucency determination, each specimen was placed on both the black and white backgrounds. Then, it was illuminated with light from a spectrophotometer with a wavelength range of 400–700 nm.

Statistical analysis

The statistical analysis involved comparing pre- and post-immersion ΔE* values and TP values among the three surface treatment groups using one-way ANOVA to assess the effect of glazing and polishing on color stability. Additionally, repeated measures ANOVA was used to evaluate translucency changes before and after immersion in coffee. Post-hoc comparisons were conducted using the Tukey test, with a significance threshold of p < 0.05.

Results

The average ∆E* values of black and white backgrounds for before and after immersion in coffee for each ceramic type are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3 Descriptive statistics and group comparisons for ∆E (Color change) for different ceramic types
Full size table

The ∆E* values across all groups—glazed, polished, and control—were not statistically significant before and after coffee immersion (P > 0.05) (Table 4). However, coffee immersion caused minimal color changes (ΔE > 1.01), which remained below the clinically perceptible threshold.

Table 4 Descriptive statistics and group comparisons for ∆E (Color change) for different surface treatments
Full size table
Table 5 Descriptive statistics and group comparisons for TP0 and TP1 across different ceramic types
Full size table
Table 6 Descriptive statistics and group comparisons for TP0 and TP1 for different surface treatments
Full size table

Significant differences were found in the translucency parameters (TP0 and TP1), where the groups differed notably, with Monolithic zirconia showing lower translucency compared to other ceramics (P < 0.001) (Table 5). However, Translucency changes were not significant among different surface treatment groups. (P > 0.05) (Table 6).

Discussion

The optical properties of CAD-CAM materials are crucial in restorative dentistry for replicating natural dental structures. These properties can be altered by glazing or polishing after adjustment [26]. This study aimed to compare the color stability of polished and glazed specimens of three CAD-CAM ceramics types using color parameters of L*, a*, b*, and ∆E. The study found no significant differences in ∆E values between the polished, glazed, and control groups, with coffee immersion causing detectable color changes, but these changes were not clinically perceptible; however, translucency remained unaffected, with Sirona zirconia showing lower translucency compared to other ceramics. Therefore, the initial hypothesis of the study was confirmed.

The thresholds for clinical acceptability and perceptibility of ΔE for intraoral detection by the naked eye are 3.7 and 1, respectively [27]. This study used the CIE-Lab system to evaluate color stability. This system evaluates color based on individual perception using three parameters. This system is widely used in dental research due to its accuracy, and the parameters are measured using a spectrophotometer [22, 28,29,30,31,32]. The spectrophotometric results on both white and black backgrounds revealed that, on the white background, ZLS and Z exhibited the lowest P-value (0.085), indicating the greatest translucency difference. In contrast, LD and ZLS showed the highest P-value (0.99), indicating the smallest difference. These findings were consistent on the black background as well.

Coffee was selected as the staining agent due to its strong pigmentation and acidic nature, which impact the color stability of dental materials. Its widespread consumption makes it a relevant factor in assessing the long-term aesthetic performance of restorations [33, 34].

In Gulce Alp et al. [35] ‘s study, zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (Vita Suprinity PC) and lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD) blocks were evaluated using a methodology similar to the present study. The results showed that color changes were clinically acceptable after coffee thermal cycling, except for the polished LDS group, where the color change was perceptible but still within clinically acceptable limits. The difference in the findings for the polished LDS group may be attributed to the use of a different polishing kit and variations in specimen thickness. Similarly, Aldosari et al. [36] investigated the effect of immersion in hot Arabic Qahwa and cold coffee, followed by thermal cycling, on the color stability (ΔE*) of polished and glazed CAD-CAM restorative materials. They reported clinically acceptable ΔE* values for glazed or polished materials, with significant changes observed only in Vita Suprinity specimens.

Demirel et al. [37] evaluated the color stability (ΔE00) of advanced lithium disilicate (ALDS), LD, and ZLS after coffee thermal cycling, reporting similar ΔE00 values across all tested materials, with no statistically significant differences. However, they observed substantial effects of material type and thermal cycling on relative translucency parameter values, with LD demonstrating the highest and ZLS the lowest translucency before and after thermal cycling. The differences in translucency values between the current study and Demirel et al. [37]’s study can be attributed to variations in material composition (lithium disilicate, zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate, and monolithic zirconia vs. advanced lithium disilicate), specimen dimensions (10 mm x 10 mm x 1 mm vs. 12 mm x 1.2 mm disks), surface treatment protocols (glazing, polishing, and control vs. glazing and spray glaze), and spectrophotometer settings (CIEDE2000 formula vs. a different calibration method).

Khomprang et al. [14] investigated the effects of coffee thermal cycling on IPS E.max CAD and IPS E.max ZirCAD Prime, reporting ΔE values exceeding clinical acceptability thresholds, unlike the current study, where color changes remained within acceptable limits (ΔE < 3.03). In contrast to the present study, Khomprang et al. observed a significant increase in translucency for lithium disilicate, whereas translucency changes were not significant here. These discrepancies may be due to differences in materials, specimen dimensions, and experimental protocols, including the application of 30,000 thermal cycles, a more intensive protocol than in this study.

Cakmak et al. [38] investigated the impact of material thickness, resin cement shade, and coffee thermal cycling on the optical properties of zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS) specimens. They found that coffee thermal cycling reduced the translucency of all specimens. Their different results in translucency values compared to the current study could be attributed to several factors, including variations in the material compositions used, the surface treatments applied, and the specific methods used to measure translucency.

Demirkol and Ozen [39] assessed the color stability of LAVA Ultimate (LU), and IPS e.max CAD (EC) under thermal cycling with coffee and cola. Similar to our study, ΔE was evaluated, and ANOVA was used for analysis. Both studies found that pigmented beverages negatively impacted ΔE, though color changes remained within an acceptable range (ΔE > 3.03). Differences included Demirkol’s finding that polished EC showed the most color change after coffee thermal cycling and recommended glazing for better stability. The differences between the two studies may be due to variations in polishing kits and specimen thickness, which was smaller in Demirkol’s study (0.5 ± 0.05 mm).

In a study by Eldwakhly et al. [40], five ceramic materials were immersed in coffee, ginger, cola, and distilled water for 28 days, with daily solution changes and twice-daily agitation to simulate 2.5 years of oral conditions. While their methodology differed from the current study, both studies measured ΔE and ΔTP on white and black backgrounds. The results showed that IPS e.max exhibited the least ΔE, with resin-based ceramics in aqueous solutions demonstrating greater color change due to water absorption, even in distilled water. IPS e.max, the only ceramic material common to both studies, showed minimal color change, remaining within an acceptable range, consistent with the current study’s findings.

In a study by Abu-Obaid et al. [41], three types of CAD-CAM ceramics were tested for color stability after immersion in a pigmented solution (coffee). The ceramics were divided into three groups: (1) glaze (control), (2) finishing and polishing, and (3) re-glazing after polishing. Color changes were measured before and after immersion. The results showed that polishing caused the most significant color change, but all changes remained clinically acceptable. Ceramics with more homogeneous microstructures, like Vita Suprinity, showed better stain resistance.

This experimental, in-vitro study provides insight into the effects of surface treatment methods (glazing, polishing, and control) on the color stability of three types of ceramics (lithium disilicate zirconia-reinforced, lithium disilicate, and monolithic zirconia) under thermal cycling in a coffee solution. Although the study utilized precise specimen preparation, thermal cycling, and color evaluation methods, it was limited by using a single staining solution and the 6-month simulated exposure. Future studies should investigate a wider variety of staining agents and longer exposure times to better simulate real-life clinical conditions and enhance the generalizability of the results.

Conclusion

This in-vitro study demonstrated that coffee immersion negatively impacted the color of all tested CAD-CAM ceramics, but the changes remained within clinically acceptable limits. Surface treatments, including polishing and glazing, did not significantly affect the ceramics’ color stability and translucency. Coffee immersion did not affect translucency. Monolithic zirconia showed the lowest translucency among the ceramics tested.

Data availability

The data supporting this study’s findings are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

ΔE*:

Color difference (CIE Lab system)

ΔTP:

Change in translucency parameter

ALDS:

Advanced lithium disilicate

CAD-CAM:

Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing

CBCT:

Cone-beam computed tomography

EC:

IPS e.max CAD

LD:

Lithium disilicate

LU:

LAVA Ultimate

TP:

Translucency parameter

Z:

Monolithic zirconia

ZLS:

Zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate

References

  1. Sadowsky SJ. An overview of treatment considerations for esthetic restorations: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96(6):433–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J. 2009;28(1):44–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Imazato S, Tarumi H, Kobayashi K, Hiraguri H, Oda K, Tsuchitani Y. Relationship between the degree of conversion and internal discoloration of light-activated composite. Dent Mater J. 1995;14(1):23–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kanat-Ertürk B. Color stability of CAD/CAM ceramics prepared with different surface finishing procedures. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(2):166–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jung M. Finishing and polishing of a hybrid composite and a heat-pressed glass ceramic. Oper Dent. 2002;27(2):175–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bottino MC, Valandro LF, Kantorski KZ, Bressiani JC, Bottino MA. Polishing methods of an alumina-reinforced feldspar ceramic. Braz Dent J. 2006;17(4):285–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dalkiz M, Sipahi C, Beydemir B. Effects of six surface treatment methods on the surface roughness of a low-fusing and an ultra low-fusing feldspathic ceramic material. J Prosthodontics: Official J Am Coll Prosthodontists. 2009;18(3):217–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Esfahani MSK, Ahmadi G, Esmaeili B. Effect of polishing versus glazing of CAD-CAM ceramics on wear and surface roughness of opposing composite resin. Dent Res J. 2024;21(1):18.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sasany R, Ergün Kunt G, Koca MF. Influence different polishing systems on roughness and colour stability of chairside CAD/CAM blocks with laminate veneer thickness. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater. 2022;20:22808000221086493.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Silva TM, Salvia AC, Carvalho RF, Pagani C, Rocha DM, Silva EG. Polishing for glass ceramics: which protocol? J Prosthodontic Res. 2014;58(3):160–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Yilmaz K, Ozkan P. The methods for the generation of smoothness in dental ceramics. Compendium Continuing Educ Dentistry. 2010;31(1):30–2. passim; quiz 42, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Villalta P, Lu H, Okte Z, Garcia-Godoy F, Powers JM. Effects of staining and bleaching on color change of dental composite resins. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;95(2):137–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ren YF, Feng L, Serban D, Malmstrom HS. Effects of common beverage colorants on color stability of dental composite resins: the utility of a thermocycling stain challenge model in vitro. J Dent. 2012;40(Suppl 1):e48–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Khomprang R, Sripetchdanond J, Chengprapakorn W. Effect of coffee thermocycling on color stability and translucency of CAD-CAM polychromatic high translucent zirconia compared with lithium disilicate glass ceramic. Clin Experimental Dent Res. 2024;10(4):e918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Richard VN. Introduction to dental materials 4th Edition 2013 09-03-2013. 264 p.

  16. Quinn JB, Sundar V, Lloyd IK. Influence of microstructure and chemistry on the fracture toughness of dental ceramics. Dent Materials: Official Publication Acad Dent Mater. 2003;19(7):603–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kang SH, Chang J, Son HH. Flexural strength and microstructure of two lithium disilicate glass ceramics for CAD/CAM restoration in the dental clinic. Restor Dentistry Endodontics. 2013;38(3):134–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Belli R, Geinzer E, Muschweck A, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U. Mechanical fatigue degradation of ceramics versus resin composites for dental restorations. Dent Materials: Official Publication Acad Dent Mater. 2014;30(4):424–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Silami FD, Tonani R, Alandia-Roman CC, Pires-de-Souza Fde C. Influence of different types of resin luting agents on color stability of ceramic laminate veneers subjected to accelerated artificial aging. Braz Dent J. 2016;27(1):95–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rinke S, Pabel A-K, #xf6 digerM, Ziebolz D. Chairside fabrication of an all-ceramic partial crown using a zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic. Case Rep Dentistry. 2016;2016:7.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kongkiatkamon S, Rokaya D, Kengtanyakich S, Peampring C. Current classification of zirconia in dentistry: an updated review. PeerJ. 2023;11:e15669.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Fujimoto J. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics, 5th Edition. 18 Sep 2015.

  23. Zeidan AAE-l, Helal MA. Evaluation of the effect of thermocycling on the trueness and precision of digitally fabricated complete denture bases. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24(1):983.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Barizon KT, Bergeron C, Vargas MA, Qian F, Cobb DS, Gratton DG, Geraldeli S. Ceramic materials for porcelain veneers. Part I: correlation between translucency parameters and contrast ratio. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;110(5):397–401.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Khorshidi S, Zarbakhsh A, Lawaf S, Golalipour S, Sayyari M, Nahavandi AM. In vitro effect of anodization of titanium abutments on color parameters and color difference of lithium disilicate all-ceramic crowns. Clin Experimental Dent Res. 2024;10(5):e70002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wu Z, Tian J, Wei D, Zhang Y, Lin Y, Di P. Effects of thickness and polishing treatment on the translucency and opalescence of six dental CAD-CAM monolithic restorative materials: an in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2023;23(1):579.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Khashayar G, Bain PA, Salari S, Dozic A, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Perceptibility and acceptability thresholds for colour differences in dentistry. J Dent. 2014;42(6):637–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Karamouzos A, Papadopoulos MA, Kolokithas G, Athanasiou AE. Precision of in vivo spectrophotometric colour evaluation of natural teeth. J Rehabil. 2007;34(8):613–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ristic I, Stankovic S, Paravina RD. Influence of color education and training on shade matching skills. Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry: official publication of the American academy of esthetic dentistry. 2016;28(5):287–94.

  30. CIE Recommendations on Uniform Color Spaces. Color-difference equations, and metric color terms. Color Res Application. 1977;2(1):5–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Chu SJ, Devigus A, Mieleszko AJ. Fundamentals of color: shade matching and communication in esthetic dentistry. Quintessence Publishing Company; 2004.

  32. Tabatabaei MH, Nahavandi AM, Khorshidi S, Hashemikamangar SS. Fluorescence and opalescence of two dental composite resins. Eur J Dentistry. 2019;13(04):527–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kaya N, Sasany R, Yanıkoglu N, Tosun B. Investigation of color and physicomechanical properties of peek and Pekk after storage in a different medium. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):5357.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Sasany R, Donmez MB, de Paula MS, Kahveci Ç, Ceylan G, Yilmaz B, Çakmak G. Stainability and translucency of potassium aluminum sulfate applied computer-aided design and computer‐aided manufacturing materials after coffee thermocycling. J Esthetic Restor Dentistry. 2024;36(3):477–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Alp G, Subasi MG, Johnston WM, Yilmaz B. Effect of surface treatments and coffee thermocycling on the color and translucency of CAD-CAM monolithic glass-ceramic. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120(2):263–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Aldosari LI, Alshadidi AA, Porwal A, Al Ahmari NM, Al Moaleem MM, Suhluli AM, et al. Surface roughness and color measurements of glazed or polished hybrid, feldspathic, and zirconia CAD/CAM restorative materials after hot and cold coffee immersion. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21(1):422.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Demirel M, Diken Türksayar AA, Donmez MB. Translucency, color stability, and biaxial flexural strength of advanced lithium disilicate ceramic after coffee thermocycling. J Esthetic Restor Dentistry. 2023;35(2):390–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Çakmak G, Donmez MB, Kashkari A, Johnston WM, Yilmaz B. Effect of thickness, cement shade, and coffee thermocycling on the optical properties of zirconia reinforced lithium silicate ceramic. J Esthetic Restor Dentistry. 2021;33(8):1132–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Demirkol N, Ozen F. Color stability of CAD/CAM materials with colored beverages thermocycling. Annals Med Res. 2019;26(9):1721–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Eldwakhly E, Ahmed DRM, Soliman M, Abbas MM, Badrawy W. Color and translucency stability of novel restorative CAD/CAM materials. Dent Med Probl. 2019;56(4):349–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. AlMawash A, Alyabis N, Alzaaqi N. An in vitro evaluation of the effect of polishing on the stainability of different CAD/CAM ceramic materials. Saudi Dent J. 2020;32(3):135–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

No funding was obtained for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Branch, Azad University, Tehran, Iran

    Reza Nahidi, Azita Mazaheri, Shaghayegh Golalipour & Negin Youshaei

  2. Department of Prosthodontics, Dental Branch, Islamic Azad University, 4 Pasdaran Avenue, Tehran, 1946853314, Iran

    Sotude Khorshidi

Authors
  1. Reza Nahidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Azita Mazaheri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shaghayegh Golalipour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Negin Youshaei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sotude Khorshidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

R.N. conducted data acquisition, project administration, data analysis, and original draft preparation. Arash Zarbakhsh supervised the project and contributed to project administration. A.M. acquired funding, conceptualized and designed the study, drafted the article, and approved the final manuscript. S.G. provided resources and data curation, contributed to software development, and approved the final manuscript. N.Y. performed critical revisions, contributed to methodology, and helped draft the article. S.K. contributed to resources and data curation, software development, and critical revisions. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sotude Khorshidi.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University, Tehran’s ethics committee approved the study. (Ethical code: IR.IAU.DENTAL.REC.1399.174.)

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nahidi, R., Mazaheri, A., Golalipour, S. et al. Comparative evaluation of color stability in polished and glazed CAD/CAM ceramics subjected to coffee thermal cycling: an in vitro study. BMC Oral Health 25, 531 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12903-025-05905-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12903-025-05905-7

Keywords

BMC Oral Health

ISSN: 1472-6831

Contact us