, Volume 107, Issue 1, pp 72–79 | Cite as

Comparison of two color-difference formulas using the Bland–Altman approach based on gingiva color space

  • Cristina Gómez PoloEmail author
  • Javier Montero
  • Ana Maria Martín Casado
Original Article


The objectives of this study were to determine the relationship between the results provided by the classical CIELab (ΔEab*) and the CIEDE2000 (ΔE00) formulas and the gingival color space using the Bland and Altman limits of agreement, to use this relationship to establish the equivalences between the gingival color thresholds of perceptibility of both formulas, and to evaluate whether the relationship between ΔEab* and ΔE00 is modified depending on the axis in which the changes occur. The means of the L*, a*, and b* coordinates of the 21 gingiva porcelain samples (Heraceram, Heraeus Kulzer Mitsui Chemical Groups) were used and the differences in color were calculated in 210 pairs of samples using the CIELab (ΔE*ab) and CIEDE2000 (ΔE00) color-difference formulas. The results obtained with these formulas were compared and the limits of agreement after a logarithmic transformation of the data were obtained. The relationship between both formulas was ln ΔE00 = − 0.22 + ln ΔEab*. The results obtained with the CIELab formula were between 1.01 (95% confidence interval 0.98–1.03) and 1.54 (95% confidence interval 1.52–1.59) times higher than those obtained with the CIEDE200 formula. In the gingiva color space, the scale factor between the CIEDE2000 and CIELab values changes from 0.63 to 1.02, such that providing an accurate scale factor between both values proves difficult. The pairs with the highest ratio were those where the difference in color was mainly due to changes in lightness, whereas the pairs with the smallest ratio were those where the difference in color was mainly due to changes in the blue–yellow or green–red axes.


Gingiva color measurement CIEDE2000 formula CIELAB formula Bland and Altman limits of agreement 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Magne P, Belser U. Bonded porcelain restorations in the anterior dentition: a biomimetic approach. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing; 2002.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fradeani M. Esthetic rehabilitation in fixed prosthodontics. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing; 2007.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fürhauser R. Evaluation of soft tissue around single—tooth implant crowns: the pink esthetic score. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005;16:639–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ahn JS, Lee YK. Color distribution of a shade guide in the value, chroma, and hue scale. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;100:18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gómez-Polo C, Gómez-Polo M, de Parga JA, Viñuela AC. Study of the most frequent natural tooth colors in the Spanish population using spectrophotometry. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015;7:413–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gómez-Polo C, Gómez-Polo M, Celemín A, ViñuelaCelemín AC, Parga JA. A clinical study relating CIELCH coordinates to the color dimensions of the 3D-Master System in a Spanish population. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;113:185–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hasegawa A, Ikeda I, Kawaguchi S. Color and translucency of in vivo natural central incisors. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83:418–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eiffler C, Cevirgen E, Helling S, Zornek J, Pritsch M, Hassel AJ. Differences in lightness, chroma, and hue in the anterior teeth of quinquagenarians and septuagenarians. Clin Oral Investig. 2010;14:587–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gómez-Polo C, Gómez-Polo M, Celemin-Viñuela A, Martínez JA, De Parga JA. Differences between the human eye and the spectrophotometer in the shade matching of tooth colour. J Dent. 2014;42:742–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Öngül D, Şermet B, Balkaya MC. Visual and instrumental evaluation of color match ability of 2 shade guides on a ceramic system. J Prosthet Dent. 2012;108:9–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kirchner E, Dekker N. Performance measures of color-difference equations: correlation coefficient versus standardized residual sum of squares. J Opt Soc Am A. 2011;28:1841–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Melgosa M, Huertas R, Berns RS. Performance of recent advanced color-difference formulae using the standardized residual sum of squares index. J Opt Soc Am A. 2008;25:1828–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Douglas RD, Steinhauer TJ, Wee AG. Intraoral determination of the tolerance of dentists for perceptibility and acceptability of shade mismatch. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;97:200–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johnston WM, Kao EC. Assessment of appearance match by visual observation and clinical colorimetry. J Dental Res. 1989;68:819–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schultze W, Gall L. Application of color difference formulae to highly saturated colors differing only in lightness and saturation. J Color Appear. 1971;1:17–24.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schultze W. The usefulness of colour-difference formulae for fixing colour tolerances. Soesterberg: AIC; 1972. p. 245–65.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Coates E, Fong KY, Rigg B. Uniform lightness scales. J Soc Dyers Colour. 1981;97:179–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Luo MR, Rigg B. BFD (l:c) colour-difference formula. II. Performance of the formulaBFD (l:c) colour-difference formula. II. Performance of the formula. J Soc Dyers Colour. 1987;103:126–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guan SS, Luo MR. Investigation of parametric effects using small colour differences. Color Res Appl. 1999;24:331–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    García PA, Huertas R, Melgosa M, Cui G. Measurement of the relationship between perceived and computed color differences. J Opt Soc Am. 2007;18:23–9.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xu BT, Zhang B, Kang Y, Wang YN, Li Q. Applicability of CIELAB/CIEDE2000 formula in visual color assessments of metal ceramic restorations. J Dent. 2012;40S:e3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gómez-Polo C, Muñoz MP, Luengo MC, Vicente P, Galindo P, Casado AM. Comparison of two color-difference formulas using the Bland-Altman approach based on natural tooth color space. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115:482–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gómez-Polo C, Muñoz MP, Luengo MC, Vicente P, Galindo P, Casado AM. Comparison of the CIELab and CIEDE2000 color difference formulas. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115:65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lee YK. Comparison of CIELAB DeltaE(*) and CIEDE2000 color-differences after polymerization and thermocycling of resin composites. Dent Mater. 2005;21:678–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ghinea R, Pérez MM, Herrera LJ, Rivas MJ, Yebra A, Paravina RD. Color difference thresholds in dental ceramics. J Dent. 2010;38(2):e57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schnitzer S, Turp JC, Heydecke G. Color distribution and visual color assessment of human gingiva and mucosa: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17:327–32.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gozalo-Diaz DJ, Lindsey DT, Johnston W, Wee AG. Measurement of color for craniofacial structures using a 45/0-degree optical configuration. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;97:45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Huang JW, Chen WC, Huang TK, Fu PS, Lai PL, Tsai CF, Hung CC. Using a spectrophotometric study of human gingival colour distribution to develop a shade guide. J Dent. 2011;39(3):e11–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Takeda T, Ishigami K, Shimada A, Ohki K. A study of discoloration of the gingiva by artificial crowns. Int J Prosthodont. 1996;9:197–202.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tjan AHL, Miller GD. Some esthetic factors in a smile. J Prosthet Dent. 1984;51:24–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Van Brakel HJ, Noordmans J, Frenken R, de Roode GC, de Wit MS. The effect of zirconia and titanium implant abutments on light reflection of the supporting soft tissues. Clin Oral Implan Res. 2011;22:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sailer I, Fehmer V, Ioannidis A, Hämmerle CHF, Thoma DS. Threshold value for the perception of color changes of human gingiva. Int J Periodontics Res Dent. 2014;34:757–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jung RE, Sailer I, Hammerle CH, Attin T, Schmidlin P. In vitro color changes of soft tissues caused by restorative materials. Int J Periodontics Res Dent. 2007;27:251–7.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jung RE, Holderegger C, Sailer I, Khraisat A, Suter A, Hämmerle CH. The effect of all-ceramic and porcelain-fused-to-metal restorations on marginal peri-implant soft tissue color: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2008;28:357–65.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sailer I, Philipp A, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE, Hämmerle CH, Zwahlen M. A systematic review of the performance of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(Suppl 4):4–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zembic A, Sailer I, Jung RE, Hämmerle CH. Randomized-controlled clinical trial of customized zirconia and titanium implant abutments for single-tooth implants in canine and posterior regions: 3-year results. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20:802–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bressan E, Paniz G, Lops D, Corazza B, Romeo E, Favero G. Influence of abutment material on the gingival color of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: a prospective multicenter study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22:631–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Happe A, Schulte-Mattler V, Fickl S, Naumann M, Zöller JE, Rothamel D. Spectrophotometric assessment of peri-implant mucosa after restoration with zirconia abutments veneered with fluorescent ceramic: a controlled, retrospective clinical study. Clin Oral Implan Res. 2013;24(100):28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ishikawa-Nagai S, Sato R, Shiraishi A, Ishibashi K. Using a computer color-matching system in color reproduction of porcelain restorations. Part 3:a newly developed spectrophotometer designed for clinical application. Int J Prosthodont. 1994;7:50–5.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Johnston WM. Color measurement in dentistry. J Dent. 2009;37:e2–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bayindir F, Bayindir YZ, Gozalo-Diaz DJ, Wee AG. Coverage error of gingival shade guide systems in measuring color of attached anterior gingiva. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101:46–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Huang JW, Chen WC, Huang TK, Fu PS, Lai PL, Tsai CF, Hung CC. Using a spectrophotometric study of human gingival colour distribution to develop a shade guide. J Dent. 2011;39(3):e11–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Amer RS, Chandrasekaran I, Johnston WM. Illuminant effect on the coverage error of a gingiva-colored composite resin shade guide. J Prosthet Dent. 2016. Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8:135–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;8:307–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sharma G. The CIEDE2000 color-difference formula. Excel spreadsheet implementation of the CIEDE2000 color-difference formula (including test data). Available at:
  47. 47.
    Pérez MM, Saleh A, Yebra A, Pulgar R. Study of the variation between CIELAB ∆E* and CIEDE2000 color-differences of resin composites. Dent Mater J. 2007;26:21–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Luo MR, Cui G, Li C. Uniform colour spaces based on CIECAM02 colour appearance model. Color Res Appl. 2006;31:320–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Park JH, Lee YK, Lim BS. Influence of illuminants on the color distribution of shade guides. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96:402–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of The Nippon Dental University 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cristina Gómez Polo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Javier Montero
    • 1
  • Ana Maria Martín Casado
    • 1
  1. 1.School of MedicineUniversity of SalamancaSalamancaSpain

Personalised recommendations