Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the surrounding and underlying shades’ effect on the color adjustment potential (CAP) of a single-shade composite used in a thin layer. Materials and Methods: Cylinder specimens (1.0 mm thick) were built with the Vittra APS Unique composite, surrounded (dual specimens) or not (simple specimens) by a control composite (shade A1, A2, or A3). Simple specimens were also built only with the control composites. Each specimen’s color was measured against white and black backgrounds or the simple control specimens with a spectrophotometer (CIELAB system). The whiteness index for dentistry (WID ) and translucency parameters (TP 00 ) were calculated for simple specimens. Differences (ΔE00 ) in color between the simple/dual specimens and the controls were calculated. The CAP was calculated based on the ratios between data from simple and dual specimens. Results: The Vittra APS Unique composite showed higher WID and TP00 values than the controls. The highest values of ΔE00 were observed among simple specimens. The color measurements of Vittra APS Unique (simple or dual) against the control specimens presented the lowest color differences. Only surrounding the single-shade composite with a shaded composite barely impacted the ΔE00 . The highest CAP values were obtained using a shaded composite under simple or dual specimens. Conclusions The CAP of Vittra APS Unique was strongly affected by the underlying shade, while surrounding this composite with a shaded one barely affected its color adjustment.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the fractal dimension (FD) measured at 2 bone sites (second cervical vertebra and mandible) on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). The research question was whether FD could serve as an accessory tool to refer postmenopausal women for densitometric analysis. Therefore, the reliability and accuracy of FD were evaluated. Materials and Methods: In total, 103 postmenopausal women were evaluated, of whom 52 had normal bone mineral density and 51 had osteoporosis, according to dual X-ray absorptiometry of the lumbar spine and hip. On the CBCT scans, 2 regions of interest were selected for FD analysis: 1 at the second cervical vertebra and 1 located at the mandible. The correlations between both measurements, intra- and inter-observer agreement, and the accuracy of the measurements were calculated. A P value less than 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance for all tests. Results: The mean FD values were significantly lower at the mandibular region of interest in osteoporotic patients than in individuals with normal bone mineral density. The areas under the curve were 0.644 (P=0.008) and 0.531 (P=0.720) for the mandibular and vertebral sites, respectively. Conclusion FD at the vertebral site could not be used as an adjuvant tool to refer women for osteoporosis investigation. Although FD differed between women with normal BMD and osteoporosis at the mandibular site, it demonstrated low accuracy and reliability.