EFFECT OF LIGHT SOURCE AND SHADE ON DEPTH OF CURE OF COMPOSITES

Joon-Sok Na; Sun-Wa Jeong; Yun-Chan Hwang; Sun-Ho Kim; Chang Yun; Won-Mann Oh; In-Nam Hwang

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.6.561

Journal List > J Korean Acad Conserv Dent > v.27(6) > 1056033

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Na, Jeong, Hwang, Kim, Yun, Oh, and Hwang: EFFECT OF LIGHT SOURCE AND SHADE ON DEPTH OF CURE OF COMPOSITES

Original Article

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2002;27(6):561-568.

Published online: 14 January 2002

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.6.561

EFFECT OF LIGHT SOURCE AND SHADE ON DEPTH OF CURE OF COMPOSITES

Joon-Sok Na, Sun-Wa Jeong, Yun-Chan Hwang, Sun-Ho Kim, Chang Yun, Won-Mann Oh, In-Nam Hwang

Dept. of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, DSRI, Chonnam National University

Dept. of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Seonam University

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

ABSTRACT

Purpose of this research is estimating polymerization depth of different source of light. XL 3000 for halogen light, Apollo 95E for plasma arc light and Easy cure for LED light source were used in this study. Different shade (B1 & A3) resin composites (Esthet-X, Dentsply, U.S.A.) were used to measure depth of cure. 1, 2, and 3 mm thick samples were light cured for three seconds, six seconds or 10 seconds with Apollo 95E and they were light cured with XL-3000 and Easy cure for 10 seconds, 20 seconds, or 40 seconds. Vicker's hardness test carried out after store samples for 24 hours in distilled water.

Results were as following.

Curing time increases from all source of lights, curing depth increased(p<0.05).
Depth (that except 1mm group and 2mm group which lighten to halogen source of light) deepens in all groups, Vickers hardness decreased(p<0.05).
Vicker's hardness of A3 shade composite was lower in all depths more than B1 shade composites in group that do polymerization for 10 seconds and 20 seconds using halogen source of light(p<0.05), but group that do polymerization for 40 seconds did not show difference(p>0.05).
Groups that do polymerization using Plasma arc and LED source of light did not show Vicker's hardness difference according to color at surface and 1mm depth(p>0.05), but showed difference according to color at 2mm and 3mm depth(p<0.05). The results showed that Apollo 95E need more polymerization times than manufacturer's recommendation (3 seconds), and Easy cure need polymerization time of XL-3000 at least.

Keywords: Curing depth, Plasma Arc, LED light

References

1. Stephen C, Bayne MS, Harald O, Heymann HO, Edward J, Swift JR. Update on dental composite restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 125:687–701. 1994.

2. Mills RW, Jandt KD. Blue LEDs for curing polymer-based dental filling materials. LEOS Newsletter. 12:9–10. 1998.

3. Shintani H, Inoue T, Yamaki M. Analysis of cam-phorquinone in visible light cured composite resins. Dent Mat. 1:14–126. 1985.

4. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Hardness of restorative resins: effect of camphorquinone, amine, and inhibitor. ACTA Odontol Scand. 47:229–231. 1989.

5. Fan PL, Wozniak WT, Reyes WD, Stanford JW. Irradiance of visible light-curing units and voltage variation effects. J Am Dent Assoc. 115:442–445. 1987.

6. Rueggeberg FA, Caughman WF. Factors affecting light transmission of single-use, plastic light-curing tips. Oper Dent. 23:179–184. 1998.

7. Pouls JG, Styner DL. Curing lights: Changes in intensity output with use over time. General Dent January-February. 70–73. 1997.

8. Pilo R, Oelgiesser D, Cardash HS. A survey of intensity and potential for depth of cure among light-curing units in clinical use. J Dent. 27:235–241. 1999.

9. Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A, Asmussen E. Characterization of resin composites polymerized with plasma arc curing units. Dent Mater. 19:330–336. 2000.

10. Munksgaard EC, Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Elution of TEGDMA and BisGMA from a resin and a resin composite cured with halogen or plasma light. Eur J Oral Sci. 108:341–345. 2000.

11. Clinical research associates newsletter volume 23, Issue 5-6. May-June 1999.

12. Pearson GJ, Longman CM. Water sorption and solubility of resin-based materials following inadequate polymerization by a visible-light curing system. J Oral Rehabil. 16:57–61. 1989.

13. Eakle WS. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with class II bonded composite resin. J Dent Res. 65:149–153. 1986.

14. Youngson CC, Glyn Jhones JC, Fox K, Smith IS, Wood DJ, Gale M. A fluid filtration and clearing techneque to assess microleakage associated with three dentine bonding systems. J Dent. 27:223–233. 1999.

15. Tsunekawa M, Setcos JC, USA mi Y, Iwaku M, Marshall SJ. A new light-activated adhesive composite: shear bond strength and microleakage. Dent Mater. 8:234–237. 1992.

16. Rueggeberg FA, Caughman WF, Curtis JW. Effect of light intensity and exposure duration on cure of resin composites. Oper Dent. 19:26–32. 1994.

17. Pires JAF, Cvitko E, Denehy G, Swift EJ Jr. Effect of curing tip distance on light intersity and composite resin microhardness. Quintessence int. 24:517–521. 1993.

18. Davidson-Kaban SS, Davidson CL, Feilzer AJ, Gee AJ, Erdilek N. The effect of curing light variations on bulk curing and wall-to-wall quality of two types and various shades of resin composites. Dent Mater. 13:344–52. 1997.

19. Vargas MA, Cobb DS, Schmit JL. Polymerization of composite resins: Argon laser vs conventional light. Oper Dent. 23:87–93. 1998.

20. Vankerckhoven H, Lambrechts P, Vanbeylen M, Davidson CL, Vanherle G. Unreated methacrylate groups on the surfaces of composite resins. J Dent Res. 61:791–796. 1982.

21. Tanoue N, Matsumura H, Atsuta M. Curing depth of prosthetic composite materials polymerized with their proprietary photo-curing units. J Oral Rehabil. 26:594–599. 1999.

22. Kawaguchi M, Fukushima T, Miyazaki M. The relationship between cure depth and transmission coeffe-cient of visible-light-activated resin composites. J Dent Res. 73:516–521. 1994.

23. Wassell RW, McCabe JF, Walls AW. Subsurface deformation associated with hardness measurements of composites. Dent Mater. 8:218–223. 1992.

24. Pilo R, Cardash HS. Post-irradition polymerization of different anterior and posterior visible light-activated resin composites. Dent Mater. 8:299–304. 1992.

25. Chung KH, Greener EH. Correlation between degree of conversion, filler concentration and mechanical properities of posterior composite resins. J Oral Rehabil. 17:487–494. 1990.

26. Harrington E, Wilson HJ. Depth of cure of radiation-activated materials: Effect of mould material and cavity size. J Dent. 21:305–311. 1993.

27. Jandt KD, Mills RW, Flackwell GB, Ashworth SH. Depth of cure and compressive strength of dental composites cured with blue light emitting diodes(LEDs). Dent Mater. 16:41–47. 2000.

28. Yap AUJ, Seneviratne C. Influence of light energy density effectiveness of composite cure. Oper Dent. 26:460–466. 2001.

29. Lloyd CH, Scrimgeour SN, Chudek JA, Mackay RL, Hunter G, Pananalkis D, Abel EW. Determination of the depth of cure for VLC composites by nuclear magnetic restoration microimaging. Dent Mater. 10:128–133. 1994.

30. Ferracane JL, Aday P, Matsumoto H, Marker VA. Relationship between shade and depth of cure for light-activated dental composite resins. Dent Mater. 2:80–84. 1986.

31. Shortall AC, Wilson HJ, Harrington E. Depth of cure of radiation-activated composite restoratives-influence of shade and opacity. J Oral Rehabil. 22:337–342. 1995.

32. Warren K. An investigation into the microhardness of a light cured composite when cured through varying thicknesses of porcelain. J Oral Rehabil. 17:327–334. 1990.

33. Sharkey S, Ray N, Burke F, Ziada H, Hannigan A. Surface hardness of light-activated resin composites cured by two different visible-light sources: An in vitro study. Quintessence int. 32:401–405. 2001.

34. Kurachi C, Tuboy AM, Magalhaes DV, Bagnato VS. Hardness evaluation a dental composite polymerize with experimental LED-based devices. Dent Mater. 17:309–315. 2001.

Fig. 1.

Schematic drawing of specimen fabrication.

Fig. 2.

Vicker's hardness number of composite cured by XL 3000

Fig. 3.

Vicker's hardness number of composite cured by Apollo 95E.

Fig. 4.

Vicker's hardness number of composite cured by Easy cure.

Fig. 5.

Mean VHN of B1 shade groups on top surface.

Fig. 6.

Mean VHN of B1 shade experimental groups on 1mm from the top surface.

Fig. 7.

Mean VHN of B1 shdae experimental groups on 2mm from the top surface.

Fig. 8.

Mean VHN of B1 shade experimental groups on 3mm from the top surface.

Fig. 9.

Ratio of the VHN by depth in B1 shade.

Fig. 10.

Ratio of the VHN by depth in A3 shade.

Table 1.

Composition of Esthet∙X

Matrix	Filler
ethoxylated Bisphenol-A-	inorganic bariumalumino
dimethacrylate	fluroborosilicate(BAFG)
Triethylene glycol dimet-	glass with nano-sized sili-
hacrylate(TEGDMA)	con dioxide particles
photoinitiation system	vol: 60%
diketone, Camphoroquin-	weight: 77%
one(CQ)

Table 2.

Tested light curing unit

Curing unit	Manufacturer	Light source	Tip Diameter
XL 3000	3M, U.S.A.	Halogen lamp	12 mm
Apollo 95E	DMD, U.S.A.	Xenon lamp	7.5 mm
Easy cure	ICS, U.S.A.	LED light	8 mm

Table 3.

Light source, resin shade and irradiation time for tested group

Light source	Curing unit	Time of i rradiation	Tested shade
Halogen	XL 3000	10, 20, 40sec	B1, A3
Plasma arc	Apollo 95E	3, 6, 10sec	B1, A3
LED	Easy cure	10, 20, 40sec	B1, A3

Table 4.

Vicker's hardness number of B1 shade Mean(S.D.), n=15

Curing unit	Curing time	top	bottom
Curing unit	Curing time	top	1mm	2mm	3mm
	10s	57.43(3.76)	54.14(5.06)^c,d	53.20(6.48)^d	33.77(5.47)
XL 3000	20s	60.68(5.38)	57.66(5.27)^g	56.40(5.18)^g	42.81(3.92)
	40s	63.40(3.49)^a	61.78(4.49)^h	61.49(6.06)^h	56.23(7.06)^f
	3s	62.36(2.36)	55.07(3.44)^c	40.04(6.38)	30.87(3.88)
Apollo 95E	6s	70.33(4.81)^b	62.89(3.95)	60.40(3.87)	52.23(6.71)
	10s	72.47(4.73)	68.59(2.04)^e	64.00(3.48)	56.71(2.47)
	10s	63.31(4.22)^a	51.42(4.21)	38.39(2.34)	27.43(3.47)
Easy cure	20s	68.33(3.68)	63.63(2.64)	48.60(3.76)	37.72(5.90)
	40s	70.66(6.20)^b	69.13(5.46)^e	64.90(3.21)	54.70(7.51)^f

The same letters were not significantly different.

Table 5.

Vicker's hardness number of A3 shade Mean(S.D.), n=15

Curing unit	Curing time	top	bottom
Curing unit	Curing time	top	1mm	2mm	3mm
	10s	51.27(5.12)	46.50(5.36)	41.65(3.28)	29.73(3.89)
XL 3000	20s	57.25(2.30)	55.82(1.69)	47.80(3.07)	46.55(3.07)
	40s	62.39(3.07)*	60.94(5.26)*	59.70(4.58)*	55.51(3.23)*
	3s	61.69(2.60)*	56.49(4.96)*	49.45(1.64)	25.00(3.70)
Apollo 95E	6s	65.87(3.09)	62.45(1.32)*	52.93(3.82)	36.96(2.89)
	10s	74.87(1.87)*	64.79(1.71)	54.49(0.77)	52.81(1.51)
	10s	55.27(1.92)	49.51(4.93)*	29.10(4.65)	22.00(3.25)
Easy cure	20s	62.87(3.09)	59.55(4.88)	44.08(5.26)	29.52(4.24)
	40s	70.87(3.50)*	62.91(2.18)	60.87(4.44)	43.89(7.08)

^* : No significant difference with B1 shade.

TOOLS

Similar articles