Staining potential differences between an infiltrative resin and an esthetic, flowable composite.

OBJECTIVE: To compare color change magnitude of an infiltrative resin and a flowable composite resin after immersion in commonly consumed beverages. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Disks (1 x 9 mm) of a flowable composite (Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable) and a resin-infiltrative product (Icon) were made. Specimens were dark-stored in tap water (24 hours). Baseline color parameters (CIE L*a*b*) were obtained using a colorimeter (Easyshade V4, VITA). Specimens were immersed (dark stored, 37 degrees C, 1 week) in commercial beverages: Kool-Aid, coffee, Coca-Cola, and tap water (control). DeltaE(00) between final and baseline conditions for each material/beverage combination was determined (N = 10/group). Initial analysis of variance indicated significant impact of major factors/interactions on DeltaE(00) . Subsequently, t-tests between DeltaE(00) values of restorative materials within each beverage was performed: alpha 0.05. RESULTS: Kool-Aid produced the greatest color change for flowable composite, with a DeltaE(00) significantly greater than the infiltrative product. No significant DeltaE(00) differences were noted between products immersed in coffee, however color parameters causing these differences were not similar. Water or Coca-Cola immersion showed lowest DeltaE(00) values for both materials, considered visually imperceptible: DeltaE(00) values <0.8. CONCLUSIONS: Color change potential of infiltrative resin or resin composite was highly dependent on beverage type, with no general trends observed in which material was affected more. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Staining potential of an infiltrative restorative resin differs from that of a filled, flowable composite material on a beverage-by-beverage basis. The potential for color change seems not related to the presence or absence of fillers in the restorative material.