scholarly journals Differences level of hybrid resin composite’s hardness based on post-irradiation time with photoactivated light emitting diode

2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Bianca ◽  
Milly Armilia Andang ◽  
Endang Sukartini
Keyword(s):  
Irradiation Time ◽  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Surface Hardness ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Hybrid Resin ◽  
Post Irradiation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Curing Light

Introduction: Adequate surface hardness of the resin composites is important to obtain optimum clinical performance of the restoratives in stress dental bearing areas. For light-activated resin composites, polymerization begins when curing light initiates polymerization and continues after the curing light goes off. The degree of conversion and hardness of resin composite is also affected by post-irradiation time. The objective of this study was to evaluate the difference of the hardness hybrid resin composite based on post-irradiation time at 10 minutes, 24 hours, and 7 days with photoactivated light-emitting diode (LED) to obtain the optimum hardness. Methods: This study was using a true experimental research method. Thirty samples of hybrid resin composites, disk-shaped of 6 mm in diameter and 2 mm in depth were polymerized by LED LCU at 800mW/cm2 for 20 seconds. The hardness of the resin composite was measured by Vickers Hardness Tester. The result was analyzed statistically with ANOVA. Results: There was a significant difference level of hardness among the three groups. Hardness mean value for post-irradiation time at 10 minutes was 56,4 VHN, for post-irradiation time at 24 hours was 65,8 VHN, and for post-irradiation time at 7 days was 60,0 VHN. Conclusion: There were differences level of hybrid resin composite’s hardness based on the post-irradiation time at 10 minutes, 24 hours, and 7 days with photoactivated LED and the optimum hardness of post-irradiation time at 24 hours.

scholarly journals Microhardness of resin-based materials polymerized with LED and halogen curing units

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniela Francisca Gigo Cefaly ◽  
Giovano Augusto de Oliveira Ferrarezi ◽  
Celiane Mary Carneiro Tapety ◽  
José Roberto Pereira Lauris ◽  
Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Surface Hardness ◽  
Bottom Surface ◽  
Halogen Lamp ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Led Light ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Light Curing ◽  
Curing Light

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microhardness of resin-based materials polymerized with a LED (light-emitting diode) light-curing unit (LCU) and a halogen LCU. Twenty cylindrical specimens (3.0 mm in diameter and 2.0 mm high) were prepared for each tested material (Z100, Definite and Dyract). Specimens were light-cured with two LCUs (Ultraled and Curing Light 2500) for either 40 or 60 s on their top surfaces. Hardness was measured on top and bottom surfaces of each specimen. Statistical analysis was done by ANOVA and Tukey's test (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in hardness between LED LCU and halogen LCU for Z100 and Dyract on top surface. Conversely, lower hardness was recorded when Definite was light-cured with the LED LCU than with the halogen lamp. On bottom surface, hardness was significantly lower for all materials light-cured with LED LCU. Z100 was harder than Dyract and Definite regardless of the light curing unit. There was no significant difference in hardness between the exposure times on top surface. Higher hardness was obtained when the materials were light-cured for 60 s on bottom surface. The tested LED was not able to produce the same microhardness of resin-based materials as the halogen LCU.

scholarly journals Surface Hardness of Nanohybrid and Microhybrid Resin Composites Cured by Light Emitting Diode and Quartz Tungsten Halogen Light Curing Systems: An Invitro Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anuradha Vitthal Wankhade ◽  
Sharad Basavraj Kamat ◽  
Santosh Irappa Hugar ◽  
Girish Shankar Nanjannawar ◽  
Sumit Balasaheb Vhate
Keyword(s):  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Surface Hardness ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Quartz Tungsten Halogen ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Intergroup Comparison ◽  
Light Curing ◽  
Curing Systems

Introduction: New generation composite resin materials have revolutionized the art of aesthetic dentistry. The clinical success is dependent on effective polymerisation and surface hardness which in turn are dependent on the performance of Light Curing Units (LCU). This study utilises surface hardness as a measure of degree of polymerisation of composite resins achieved by LCUs. Aim: To evaluate the difference in surface hardness of nanohybrid and microhybrid resin composites cured by light curing systems, Light Emitting Diode (LED) and Quartz Tungsten Halogen (QTH). Materials and Methods: In this invitro experimental study, two types of hybrid composites (Nanohybrid and Microhybrid) were tested for surface hardness by using two different light curing systems (LED and QTH). All the Nanohybrid and Microhybrid specimens were cured using LED and QTH LCUs, thus giving four combinations. A total of 60 specimens (6 mm diameter and 2 mm depth) were prepared using Teflon mould with 15 samples for each combination. Surface hardness was measured on upper and lower surface after 24 hours and hardness ratio was calculated. Data was analysed using independent t-test for intergroup comparison. Level of significance was kept at 5%. Results: Surface hardness of resin composites cured by LED LCU was greater than those cured by QTH LCU. Additionally, the hardness value was greater for the upper surface. Nanohybrids showed better surface hardness than Microhybrids for both the LCUs. Conclusion: Nanohybrid composite resins and LED system were found to be more effective in terms of surface hardness as compared to their counterparts.

Effect of Photoactivation Systems and Resin Composites on the Microleakage of Esthetic Restorations

2007 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gláucia Maria Bovi Ambrosano ◽  
Larissa Maria Assad Cavalcante ◽  
Alessandra Resende Peris ◽  
André Vicente Ritter ◽  
Luiz André Freire Pimenta
Keyword(s):  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Vertical Slot ◽  
Quartz Tungsten Halogen ◽  
Ion Laser ◽  
Blue Solution ◽  
Qth Light

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of four photoactivation systems [quartz tungsten halogen (QTH), light-emitting diode (LED), argon ion laser (AL), and plasma arc curing PAC)] on cementum/ dentin and enamel microleakage of Class II restorations using a microhybrid [Z250 – 3M ESPE] and two packable composites [(SureFil - Dentsply and Tetric Ceram HB – Ivoclair/Vivadent]. Methods and Materials Three hundred sixty “vertical-slot Class II cavities” were prepared at the mesial surface of bovine incisors using a 245 carbide bur in a highspeed handpiece. Specimens were divided into twelve groups (composite-photoactivation systems). Half of the specimens had the gingival margin placed in enamel (n=15) and the other half in cementum/dentin (n=15). Composites were inserted and cured in 2 mm increments according to manufacturers’ recommended exposure times. After polishing, the samples were immersed in 2% methylene blue solution, sectioned, and evaluated at the gingival margins. Data were submitted to statistical analysis using the Kruskal–Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests. Results No significant differences were found among the photoactivation systems and among resin composites (p>0.05). Microleakage was not significantly affected by location (enamel vs. cementum/dentin, p>0.05). These findings suggested neither the photoactivation systems nor the resin composite types might have an effect on the microleakage at gingival margins Class II cavities. Citation Cavalcante LMA, Peris AR, Ambrosano GMB, Ritter AV, Pimenta LAF. Effect of Photoactivation Systems and Resin Composites on the Microleakage of Esthetic Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007 February;(8)2:070-079.

scholarly journals Long-term Failure Rate of Brackets Bonded with Plasma and High-intensity Light-emitting Diode Curing Lights

2007 ◽  
Vol 77 (4) ◽  
pp. 707-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolaos Pandis ◽  
Sophia Strigou ◽  
Theodore Eliades
Keyword(s):  
Failure Rate ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Irradiation Time ◽  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Similar Treatment ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Curing Light ◽  
High Intensity Light

Abstract Objective: To comparatively assess the long-term failure rate of brackets bonded with a plasma or a high-intensity light-emitting diode (LED) curing light. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five patients with complete permanent dentitions with similar treatment planning and mechanotherapy were selected for the study. Brackets were bonded according to a split-mouth design with the 3M Ortholite Plasma or the high-power Satelec mini LED Ortho curing light. Irradiation with the two curing lights was performed for 9 seconds at an alternate quadrant sequence so that the bonded brackets cured with either light were equally distributed on the maxillary and mandibular right and left quadrants. First-time bracket failures were recorded for a mean period of 15 months (range 13–18 months) and the results were analyzed with the chi-square test and binary logistic regression. Results: The failure rate for brackets was 2.8% for the plasma light and 6.7% for the LED light source. Although significantly more failures were found for the mandibular arch, no difference was identified in failure rate between anterior and posterior teeth. Conclusions: High-intensity LED curing lights present a 2.5 times higher failure rate relative to plasma lamps for nominally identical irradiation time. Mandibular teeth show almost 150% higher failure incidence compared with maxillary teeth. No effect from the arch side (right vs left) and location (anterior vs posterior) was identified in this study.

scholarly journals The Effect of Irradiation Distance on Microhardness of Resin Composites Cured with Different Light Curing Units

2010 ◽  
Vol 04 (04) ◽  
pp. 440-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isil Cekic-Nagas ◽  
Ferhan Egilmez ◽  
Gulfem Ergun
Keyword(s):  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Composite Layer ◽  
Hardness Test ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Plasma Arc ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Quartz Tungsten Halogen ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Light Curing

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the microhardness of five different resin composites at different irradiation distances (2 mm and 9 mm) by using three light curing units (quartz tungsten halogen, light emitting diodes and plasma arc).Methods: A total of 210 disc-shaped samples (2 mm height and 6 mm diameter) were prepared from different resin composites (Simile, Aelite Aesthetic Enamel, Clearfil AP-X, Grandio caps and Filtek Z250). Photoactivation was performed by using quartz tungsten halogen, light emitting diode and plasma arc curing units at two irradiation distances (2 mm and 9 mm). Then the samples (n=7/ per group) were stored dry in dark at 37°C for 24 h. The Vickers hardness test was performed on the resin composite layer with a microhardness tester (Shimadzu HMV). Data were statistically analyzed using nonparametric Kruskal Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests.Results: Statistical analysis revealed that the resin composite groups, the type of the light curing units and the irradiation distances have significant effects on the microhardness values (P<.05).Conclusions: Light curing unit and irradiation distance are important factors to be considered for obtaining adequate microhardness of different resin composite groups. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:440-446)

Degree of Conversion and Polymerization Shrinkage of Bulk-Fill Resin-Based Composites

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Yu ◽  
AUJ Yap ◽  
XY Wang
Keyword(s):  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Degree Of Conversion ◽  
Attenuated Total Reflectance ◽  
Polymerization Shrinkage ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Light Curing ◽  
Curing Light ◽  
The Mean

SUMMARY This study evaluated the degree of conversion (DC) and polymerization shrinkage (PS) of contemporary bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) including giomer materials. Two giomer bulk-fill (Beautifil Bulk Restorative [BBR], Beautifil Bulk Flowable [BBF]), two nongiomer bulk-fill (Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-fill [TNB], Smart Dentin Replacement [SDR]), and three conventional non–bulk-fill (Beautifil II [BT], Beautifil Flow Plus [BF], Tetric N-Ceram [TN]) RBCs were selected for the study. To evaluate the DC, disc-shaped specimens of 5-mm diameter and 2-mm, 4-mm, and 6-mm thickness were fabricated using customized Teflon molds. The molds were bulk filled with the various RBCs and cured for 20 seconds using a light-emitting diode curing light with an irradiance of 950 mW/cm2. The DC (n=3) was determined by attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy by computing the spectra of cured and uncured specimens. PS (n=3) was measured with the Acuvol volumetric shrinkage analyzer by calculating specimen volumes before and after light curing. The mean DC for the various materials ranged from 46.03% to 69.86%, 45.94% to 69.38%, and 30.65% to 67.85% for 2 mm, 4 mm, and 6 mm, respectively. For all depths, SDR had the highest DC. While no significant difference in DC was observed between depths of 2 mm and 4 mm for the bulk-fill RBCs, DC at 2 mm was significantly greater than 6 mm. For the conventional RBCs, DC at 2 mm was significantly higher than at 4 mm and 6 mm. Mean PS ranged from 1.48% to 4.26% for BBR and BF, respectively. The DC at 2 mm and PS of bulk-fill RBCs were lower than their conventional counterparts. At 4 mm, the DC of giomer bulk-fill RBCs was lower than that of nongiomer bulk-fill materials.

scholarly journals Microleakage under Orthodontic Brackets Using High-Intensity Curing Lights

2009 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mustafa Ulker ◽  
Tancan Uysal ◽  
Sabri Ilhan Ramoglu ◽  
Huseyin Ertas
Keyword(s):  
High Intensity ◽  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Bonferroni Correction ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Halogen Light ◽  
Halogen Light Source ◽  
Light Curing ◽  
Curing Light ◽  
High Intensity Light ◽  
Nail Varnish

Abstract Objective: To compare the microleakage of the enamel-adhesive-bracket complex at the occlusal and gingival margins of brackets bonded with high-intensity light curing lights and conventional halogen lights. Materials and Methods: Forty-five freshly extracted human maxillary premolar teeth were randomly separated into three groups of 15 teeth each. Stainless steel brackets were bonded in all groups according to the manufacturer's recommendations. Specimens (15 per group) were cured for 40 seconds with a conventional halogen light, 20 seconds with light-emitting diode (LED), and 6 seconds with plasma arc curing light (PAC). After curing, the specimens were further sealed with nail varnish, stained with 0.5% basic-fuchsine for 24 hours, sectioned and examined under a stereomicroscope, and scored for microleakage for the enamel-adhesive and bracket-adhesive interfaces from both the occlusal and gingival margins. Statistical analyses were performed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-tests with a Bonferroni correction. Results: The type of light curing unit did not significantly affect the amount of microleakage at the gingival or occlusal margins of investigated interfaces (P &gt;.05). The gingival sides in the LED and PAC groups exhibited higher microleakage scores compared with those observed on occlusal sides for the enamel-adhesive and adhesive-bracket interfaces. The halogen light source showed similar microleakage at the gingival and occlusal sides between both adhesive interfaces. Conclusions: High-intensity curing units did not cause more microleakage than conventional halogen lights. This supports the use of all these curing units in routine orthodontic practice.

scholarly journals Analysis of Energy and Cost Performance of Retrofitting Fluorescent Tubes with Compact Fluorescent and Light Emitting Diode Lamps

2020 ◽  
pp. 34-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. S. Adeleke ◽  
A. B. Wahab ◽  
E. A. Olanipekun
Keyword(s):  
Light Emitting Diode ◽  
Electricity Consumption ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Payback Period ◽  
Optimal Performance ◽  
Light Emitting ◽  
Tertiary Institutions ◽  
Fluorescent Lamps ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Compact Fluorescent Lamp

Over the years, visual comfort has been described as a major requirement needed to enhance optimal performance of occupants in any learning environment in tertiary institutions. This is reflected in the poor performance of the commonly used Fluorescent Lamps (FL) occasioned by its constant burn-off, high failure rate and reduced durability. Hence, there is a shift to the adoption of Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) and Light Emitting Diode (LED). This study therefore examined the pattern of electricity consumption involving the adoption of FL, CFL and LED in the purposively selected lecture theatres of Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. The study was carried out using energy monitor to obtain the consumption data of the lamps for periodic logging at intervals of 1 hr, 3 hrs, 6 hrs, 12 hrs, 1 day, 7 days, 1 month and 3 months respectively; and also to determine the payback period of each of the lamps. From the data collected, patterns of electricity used, electricity savings were calculated and compared to establish performance potentials of each of the lamps. The study found that there was a significant difference in the pattern of electricity consumption of FLs compared with that of CFLs and LEDs, but a reduced margin existed between CFLs and LED lamps. It showed that the FLs consumed 681.576 kWh, 1619.466 kWh and 5652.432 kWh, CFLs consumed 387.302 kWh, 692.479 kWh and 1936.600 kWh, while LED consumed 294.188 kWh, 426.608 kWh and 1499.015 kWh. There were significant differences in consumption with 43, 47 and 65% reduction in electricity consumption using CFLs while 57, 73 and 73% using LED fittings were obtained. The CFLs performed better in terms of return on investments by having a lower payback period when compared to LED. The study concluded that replacing FL with CFL and LED would be desirable option in order to enhance optimal performance of lecture theatres, but in terms of payback period, it would be beneficial to retrofit FLs with CFLs.

Influence of Different Restoration Techniques on Fracture Resistance of Root-filled Teeth: In Vitro Investigation

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
ME Hshad ◽  
EE Dalkılıç ◽  
GC Ozturk ◽  
I Dogruer ◽  
F Koray
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Compressive Force ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Hybrid Resin ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
In Vitro Investigation ◽  
Significant Difference

SUMMARY Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the fracture strength of endodontically treated mandibular premolar teeth restored with composites and different reinforcement techniques. Methods and Materials: Forty-eight freshly extracted human mandibular premolar teeth were randomly divided into four groups: group IN, group CR, group FRC, and group PRF. Group IN consisted of teeth with intact crowns and served as the control group. In the other three groups, endodontic treatment was performed and standard mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities were prepared. Then cavities were restored with hybrid resin composite only, flowable composite and hybrid resin composite, and Ribbond, flowable composite and hybrid resin composite in groups CR, FRC and PRF, respectively. All of the teeth were subjected to fracture by means of a universal testing machine, and compressive force was applied with a modified stainless-steel ball at a crosshead speed at 0.5 mm/min. Results: The highest values were observed in group IN, while the lowest values were determined in group CR. There was not any statistically significant difference between group CR and group FCR (p&gt;0.05). When groups CR, FCR, and PRF were compared, group PRF showed significantly better fracture strength than did groups CR and FCR (p&lt;0.05). It was determined that there was not any significant difference between group IN and group PRF (p&gt;0.05). Conclusions: Polyethylene ribbon fiber considerably increases the fracture strength of mandibular premolar teeth with MOD cavities restored with composite.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document