ArticleBiomaterial investigations in dentistry2026
Colour stability of Siloczest LSR 120 against Cosmesil M511 maxillofacial silicones under simulated environmental ageing conditions.
Article in Biomaterial investigations in dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Maxillofacial prostheses play a vital role in rehabilitating facial form and function, with long-term colour stability being a key determinant of patient satisfaction. These prostheses are routinely exposed to ultraviolet radiation, sweat, and cleaning agents, which may compromise their appearance over time. Aim: To compare the colour stability of two maxillofacial silicone elastomers, Siloczest LSR 120 and Cosmesil M511 under simulated ageing conditions replicating clinical exposures. Materials and methods: A total of 80 samples (40 per material) were fabricated and divided into four subgroups based on ageing conditions: sunlight, artificial sweat, immersion in neutral soap, and a combination of sunlight and sweat. Colour measurements were recorded before and after 6 months of ageing, except for neutral soap (30 hours) using the Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage Lab* ( CIE L*a*b*) system via a spectrophotometer, and ΔE values were calculated. Data were analysed using SPSS v28. Normality was assessed with Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests. Independent Results: Both materials exhibited colour changes under all conditions. No statistically significant difference was observed between Siloczest LSR 120 and Cosmesil M511 under isolated sunlight or sweat exposure. However, Siloczest LSR 120 showed significantly higher discolouration under neutral soap (ΔE-1.48) and combined sunlight and sweat conditions (ΔE-6.68) against Cosmesil M511 (ΔE-0.68 & 3.82 respectively), ( Conclusion: The results suggest that while Cosmesil M511 remains the more reliable option for long-term aesthetics, Silicozest LSR 120 demonstrates promising performance. Although its colour stability was comparatively poorer under neutral soap and combined exposure, the observed changes remained within clinically acceptable limits for darker skin tones (ΔE < 10.07), indicating that it can still be considered a viable material for clinical use in appropriate contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.