title: Contrast ratio of veneering and core ceramics as a function of thickness.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The recent development of several dental ceramic products has raised questions concerning the relative translucency potential of these materials. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that the contrast ratio of dental core and veneering ceramics is a linear function of ceramic thickness.
  
  
  METHODS
  Four groups of disk-shaped core ceramic specimens and four groups of veneering ceramic specimens (15 mm in diameter and 0.70, 1.10, 1.25, or 1.50 mm in thickness) were prepared for analysis. Five disks were randomly assigned to each of the eight groups. Four core ceramics were selected for study: (1) tetrasilicic fluormica glass ceramic, (2) quadruple-chain silicate glass ceramic, (3) barium silicate glass ceramic, and (4) sintered alumina. The four veneering ceramics included two feldspathic body porcelains, one fine-grained veneering porcelain, and one ultralow-fusing porcelain.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were significant differences among the mean contrast ratio values of these materials. The most translucent group of the core materials was tetrasilicic fluormica glass ceramic, and the least translucent material was sintered alumina. The most translucent group among the veneering ceramics was one of the feldspathic ceramics (Ceramco), and the least translucent material for all thicknesses was the ultralow-fusing veneering ceramic (Duceram LFC). The mean contrast ratio values were significantly different at a thickness of 1.50 mm of the four core ceramic groups and among the four veneering ceramic groups.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results of this study indicate that the tetrasilicic fluormica glass ceramic is generally the most translucent core ceramic for thicknesses of 0.70, 1.10, and 1.25 mm, and Ceramco porcelain is the most translucent veneering ceramic. However, for a thickness of 1.50 mm, the quadruple-chain silicate glass ceramic was the most translucent core ceramic. The relationship between contrast ratio and thickness was linear for all ceramics except Vita VMK 68.
authors.affiliation: New Products Group, Dentsply/Caulk, 38 West Clarke Avenue, PO Box 359, Milford, Delaware 19963-0359, USA. santonson@dentsply.com
authors.forename: S A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Antonson
authors.forename: K J
authors.initials: KJ
authors.lastname: Anusavice
mesh_terms: D000537:Aluminum Oxide / Q000737:chemistry; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D002516:Ceramics / Q000737:chemistry; D055598:Chemical Phenomena; D002627:Chemistry, Physical; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry; D003722:Dental Alloys / Q000737:chemistry; D003776:Dental Porcelain / Q000737:chemistry*; D003801:Dental Veneers; D008027:Light; D008422:Materials Testing; D011897:Random Allocation; D017640:Silicates / Q000737:chemistry; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric
chemical_list: D003188:Composite Resins; D003722:Dental Alloys; C095718:Duceram; D017640:Silicates; D003776:Dental Porcelain; C037884:finesse; C023506:Glass ceramics; C058233:Ceramco; C047040:Vita VMK 68; D000537:Aluminum Oxide