Correlation between depth of cure and surface hardness of a light-activated resin

Effect of irradiance from curing units on the microhardness of composite - a systematic review

Purpose The systematic review aims to evaluate the effect of light irradiance from light-curing units on microhardness of composite.Materials and methods The protocol was registered in PROSPERO following which primary search was carried out via MedLine, Scopus and Cochrane Library. A customised tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Among the 303 records retrieved from the databases, only ten articles qualified for qualitative synthesis after meeting all the requirements of the eligibility criteria. Covidence software was used to record the decisions. The studies published until 31 March 2021 were taken up for the review. The articles showed a low-to-moderate risk of bias.Results From a total of 303 articles, ten articles were reviewed for full text. Ten in vitro studies were included for qualitative analysis. There was heterogeneity in sample size, curing time and outcome measured. Therefore, meta-analysis was not performed. Out of ten studies, seven studies reported higher microhardness value for higher intensity than lower intensity of light.Conclusion Despite the fact that the findings of the evaluated studies are quite variable, significant scientific evidence revealed that high light intensity can enhance the hardness of resin composites.

On the inaccuracies of dental radiometers

This study investigated the accuracy of sixteen models of commercial dental radiometers (DR) in measuring the output of thirty-eight LED light curing units (LCUs) compared with a 'gold standard' laboratory-grade spectrometer integrating-sphere (IS) assembly. Nineteen Type I (fiber-bundle light guide) and nineteen Type II (light source in head) LED LCUs were tested, some using different output modes and light guides, resulting in 61 test subsets per radiometer. Gold standard (GS) output measurements (n = 3) were taken using the IS and confirmed with two types of laboratory-grade power meter (PowerMax-Pro 150 HD and PM10-19C; Coherent). One DR (Bluephase Meter II, Ivoclar; BM II) allowed power (mW) as well as irradiance (mW/cm²) recordings. Irradiance readings (n = 3) for each DR/LCU were compared with the IS derived irradiance. Individual LCU irradiance values were normalized against IS data. The GS method yielded reproducible data with a 0.4% pooled coefficient of variation for the LCUs. Mean power values ranged from 0.19 W to 2.40 W. Overall power values for the laboratory-grade power meters were within 5% of GS values. Individual LCU/DR normalized irradiance values ranged from 7% to 535% of the GS; an order of magnitude greater than previous reports. BM II was the only radiometer to average within 20% of normalized pooled GS irradiance values, whereas other radiometers differed by up to 85%. Ten radiometers failed to provide any reading for 1 LCU. When tested with the PowerMax-Pro in high speed (20 kHz) mode, eight LCUs demonstrated pulsing outputs undetectable at the standard (10 Hz) data acquisition rate. Sufficient light exposure is critical for the successful curing of dental resin-based materials. Substantial discrepancies may occur between actual and estimated radiometric data using current DRs. More accurate DRs need to be developed. Manufacturers' accuracy claims for DRs should specify compatible LCUs and testing parameters.

Effect of the Time of Salivary Contamination during Light Curing on Degree of Conversion and Microhardness of a Restorative Composite Resin

Saliva contamination is a major clinical problem in restorative procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the time of salivary contamination during light curing on the degree of conversion and the microhardness of a restorative composite resin. Eight groups of 10 samples for measuring the microhardness and eight groups of 5 samples for evaluating the degree of conversion were prepared. The samples of each group were contaminated with human saliva at a certain time. The first group (T0) was contaminated before light curing. The specimens in groups T2–T30 were contaminated at 2, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 s after the start of light curing, respectively. The samples of group T40 were contaminated after light curing. The degree of conversion and the microhardness of the specimens were measured by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and Vickers hardness testing techniques, respectively. The results of this study revealed that there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the degree of conversion of the composite resin. Consistent with the findings for the degree of conversion, significant differences in the microhardness between the groups were not found. In conclusion, from a clinical point of view, the results of our study showed that the time of salivary contamination (before, during or after light curing of composite resin) has no significant effect on the polymerization (degree of conversion) and one of the important mechanical properties of dental composite resins (microhardness).

Influence of light-activation protocol on methacrylate resin-composite evaluated by dynamic mechanical analysis and degree of conversion

The aim of this study was to evaluate the degree of conversion (DC) and to identify the viscoelastic properties: storage modulus (E'), loss modulus (E"), tangent delta (tan δ), and glass transition temperature (T g ) of a microhybrid resin-composite light-activated by three different protocols. A Filtek Z250 (3 M ESPE) shade A3 was inserted in a Teflon mold (21 mm × 5 mm × 1 mm for viscoelastic properties; and 5 mm × 1 mm for DC) and light-activated according to the following light-activation protocols: (S) 1,000 mW/cm(2) × 19 s, (HP) 1,400 mW/cm(2) × 14 s, and (PE) 3,200 mW/cm(2) × 6 s, all set up to deliver 19 J/cm(2). Viscoelastic properties was assessed by dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) (n = 3), performed in single cantilever clamped mode. DC (n = 5) was measured by FTIR on top (T) and bottom (B) surfaces, and the data was submitted to a split-plot one-way ANOVA. For DC, there was a significant effect for surface factor and light-activation protocols factor. Top surface showed higher DC than B in all experimental conditions. Light-activation protocols S and HP resulted in higher DC than PE and were similar between them. Viscoelastic properties (E', E", tan δ, T g ) were not affected by light-activation protocols. It could be concluded that light-activation protocols influenced DC but not influenced the viscoelastic properties.

Effect of seating forces on cement-ceramic adhesion in microtensile bond tests

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different seating forces during cementation in cement-ceramic microtensile bond strength (μTBS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-five blocks (5 × 5 × 4 mm(3)) of a glass-infiltrated alumina-based ceramic (In-Ceram Alumina) were fabricated according to the manufacturer's instructions and duplicated in resin composite. Ceramic surfaces were polished, cleaned for 10 min in an ultrasonic bath, silica coated using a laboratory type of air abrasion device, and silanized. Each treated ceramic block was then randomly assigned to five groups (n = 9) and cemented to a composite block under five seating forces (10 g, 50 g, 100 g, 500 g, and 750 g) using a dual-cured resin cement (Panavia F). The ceramic-cement-composite assemblies were cut under coolant water to obtain bar specimens (1 mm × 0.8 mm(2)). The μTBS tests were performed in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). The mean bond strengths values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA (α ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

Different seating forces resulted in no significant difference in the μTBS results ranging between 13.1 ± 4.7 and 18.8 ± 2.1 MPa (p = 0.13) and no significant differences among cement thickness.

CONCLUSIONS

Excessive seating forces during cementation seem not to affect the μTBS results.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Excessive forces during the seating of single all-ceramic restorations cementation seem to display the same tensile bond strength to the resin cement.

The effects of halogen and light-emitting diode light curing on the depth of cure and surface microhardness of composite resins

Aim:

Light-emitting diode light curing units (LED LCUs) have become more popular than halogen LCUs in routine dental restorative treatment. The aim of the study was to compare the effects of two conventional halogen (Hilux Plus and VIP) and two LED (Elipar FreeLight 2 and Smart Lite) light curing units on the depth of cure and the microhardness of various esthetic restorative materials.

Materials and Methods:

The curing depth and microhardness of a compomer (Dyract Extra), a resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer), a packable composite (Sculpt It), an ormocer (Admira), a hybrid composite (Tetric Ceram), two microhybrid composites (Miris and Clearfil Photo Posterior) and, a nanofil composite (Filtek Supreme) were determined using a scraping method and a hardness tester. A total of 320 samples were prepared using the eight different materials (n = 10 samples for each subgroup). The scraping test was based on ISO 4049:2000. Vicker's microhardness testing was carried out using hardness tester (Zwick 3212). Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Bonferroni and the Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests.

Results:

Best microhardness results were obtained with the LED light curing units and Tetric EvoCeram and Filtek Supreme achieved the highest hardness values. The nanofil composite, Filtek Supreme, showed the best curing depth results in all the tested light curing systems.

Conclusions:

The LEDs were found to be more successful than the halogen units with respect to both curing depth and microhardness properties.