World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 14 , ISSUE 9 ( September, 2023 ) > List of Articles


Comparative Evaluation of VITA Shade Guide and Various Composite Shades Using Spectrophotometer, Digital Single-lens Reflex, and Cellphone: An In Vitro Study

Aman Verma, Sonali Taneja, Surabhi Ghosh

Keywords : Composite shade matching, Digital shade selection, Smartphone analysis, Spectrophotometric analysis, VITA shade guide

Citation Information : Verma A, Taneja S, Ghosh S. Comparative Evaluation of VITA Shade Guide and Various Composite Shades Using Spectrophotometer, Digital Single-lens Reflex, and Cellphone: An In Vitro Study. World J Dent 2023; 14 (9):803-808.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2297

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-10-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2023; The Author(s).


Aim: This study aims to evaluate the L*, a*, and b* values of different composite shades and their corresponding VITA shade tabs using digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) and cellphone images and comparing their values with a spectrophotometer. Materials and methods: Three commercially available resin composites of shades A3B, B1B, and C2B were evaluated—Estelite Σ Quick (Tokuyama, Japan), Beautiful II (Shofu, Germany), and Filtek Z350 XT (3M ESPE) along with their corresponding VITA (Vita Zahnfabrik) shade tabs. Six samples of each shade from each manufacturer were made using molds of shade tabs from VITA shade guide, using polyvinyl siloxane impression material. These molds were then filled with composite (n = 6), polymerized, and stored in a lightproof environment for 24 hours. For spectrophotometric analysis, the Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (CIE) XYZ data was obtained and converted to CIE 1976 (L*, a*, b*) (CIELAB). For DSLR and cellphone, the images were captured and analyzed using graphic software. After the data collection, ΔE* for all three parameters, that is, spectrophotometer, DSLR, and cellphone, was evaluated for each shade of all the manufacturers and compared with the VITA shade tabs. Result: When ΔE values for DSLR and cellphone were compared with spectrophotometer, ΔE for spectrophotometer vs cellphone was significantly more. When the L*, a*, and b* values of different shades of 3M captured using DSLR and cellphone were compared, for shade A3, L* value was not statistically significant (p < 0.05). Similarly, when different shades of Shofu were compared, for shade A3, there was no statistical difference in L* and a* value (p < 0.05), and for shade C2, there was a nonsignificant difference in b* values (p < 0.05). Conclusion: This study showed that the use of cellphones for composite shade matching could be a reliable and easy method. Clinical significance: The study signifies the utility of cellphones during composite shade matching to make the procedure more convenient and untroublesome.

  1. Alomari M, Chadwick RG. Factors influencing the shade matching performance of dentists and dental technicians when using two different shade guides. Br Dent J 2011;211(11): E23. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.1006
  2. Paolone G, Orsini G, Manauta J, et al. Composite shade guides and color matching. Int J Esthet Dent 2014;9(2):164–182. PMID: 24765625.
  3. Liberato WF, Barreto IC, Costa PP, et al. A comparison between visual, intraoral scanner, and spectrophotometer shade matching: a clinical study. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121(2):271–275. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.05.004
  4. Ebeid K, Sabet A, Della Bona A. Accuracy and repeatability of different intraoral scanners on shade determination. J Esthet Restor Dent 2021;33(6):844–848. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12687
  5. Ishikawa-Nagai S, Yoshida A, Sakai M, et al. Clinical evaluation of perceptibility of color differences between natural teeth and all-ceramic crowns. J Dent 2009;37:(Suppl 1):e57–e63. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2009.04.004
  6. Parameswaran V, Anilkumar S, Lylajam S, et al. Comparison of accuracies of an intraoral spectrophotometer and conventional visual method for shade matching using two shade guide systems. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016;16(4):352–358. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.176537
  7. Browning WD, Chan DC, Blalock JS, et al. A comparison of human raters and an intra-oral spectrophotometer. Oper Dent 2009;34(3):337–343. DOI: 10.2341/08-106
  8. Da Silva JD, Park SE, Weber HP, et al. Clinical performance of a newly developed spectrophotometric system on tooth color reproduction. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99(5):361–368. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60083-9
  9. Ishikawa-Nagai S, Yoshida A, Da Silva JD, et al. Spectrophotometric analysis of tooth color reproduction on anterior all-ceramic crowns: part 1: analysis and interpretation of tooth color. J Esthet Restor Dent 2010;22(1):42–52. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2009.00311.x
  10. Hein S, Tapia J, Bazos P. eLABor_aid: a new approach to digital shade management. Int J Esthet Dent 2017;12(2):186–202. PMID: 28653050.
  11. Dirik AE, Sencar HT, Memon N. Digital single lens reflex camera identification from traces of sensor dust. IEEE Trans Inf Forens Secur 2008;3(3):539–552. DOI: 10.1109/TIFS.2008.926987
  12. Tabatabaian F, Beyabanaki E, Alirezaei P, et al. Visual and digital tooth shade selection methods, related effective factors and conditions, and their accuracy and precision: a literature review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2021;33(8):1084–1104. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12816
  13. Hardan L, Bourgi R, Cuevas-Suárez CE, et al. Novel trends in dental color match using different shade selection methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Materials (Basel) 2022;15(2):468. DOI: 10.3390/ma15020468
  14. Sirintawat N, Leelaratrungruang T, Poovarodom P, et al. The accuracy and reliability of tooth shade selection using different instrumental techniques: an in vitro study. Sensors (Basel) 2021;21(22):7490. DOI: 10.3390/s21227490
  15. Yamanel K, Caglar A, Özcan M, et al. Assessment of color parameters of composite resin shade guides using digital imaging versus colorimeter. J Esthet Restor Dent 2010;22(6):379–388. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2010.00370.x
  16. Terry DA, Geller W, Tric O, et al. Anatomical form defines color: function, form, and aesthetics. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2002;14(1):59–67. PMID: 11905160.
  17. Yap AU, Bhole S, Tan KB. Shade match of tooth-colored restorative materials based on a commercial shade guide Quintessence Int 1995;26(10):697–702. PMID: 8935111.
  18. Ardu S, Gutemberg D, Krejci I, et al. Influence of water sorption on resin composite color and color variation amongst various composite brands with identical shade code: an in vitro evaluation. J Dent 2011;39(Suppl 1):e37–e44. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.06.010
  19. Paravina RD, Kimura M, Powers JM. Color compatibility of resin composites of identical shade designation. Quintessence Int 2006;37(9):713–719. PMID: 17017633.
  20. Li Q, Yu H, Wang YN. Spectrophotometric evaluation of the optical influence of core build-up composites on all-ceramic materials. Dent Mater 2009;25(2):158–165. DOI: 10.1016/
  21. Uchida H, Vaidyanathan J, Viswanadhan T, et al. Color stability of dental composites as a function of shade. J Prosthet Dent 1998;79(4):372–377. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70147-7
  22. Salgado VE, Rego GF, Schneider LF, et al. Does translucency influence cure efficiency and color stability of resin-based composites? Dent Mater 2018;34(7):957–966. DOI: 10.1016/
  23. de Bragança RMF, Moraes RR, Faria-E-Silva AL. Color assessment of resin composite by using cellphone images compared with a spectrophotometer. Restor Dent Endod 2021;46(2):e23. DOI: 10.5395/rde.2021.46.e23
  24. Kim SJ, Lin HT, Lu Z, et al. A new in-camera imaging model for color computer vision and its application. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intel 2012;34(12):2289–2302. DOI: 10.1109/TPAMI.2012.58
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.