Influence of different light sources on the conversion of composite resins

• Main Authors: Emerson H Silva (Author), Rodrigo C Albuquerque (Author), Lincoln D Lanza (Author), Guilherme C Vieira (Author), Rogéli TRC Peixoto (Author), Hugo H Alvim (Author), Maria I Yoshida (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2011-01-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.

Summary

Aims: The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the influence of different light curing units on the conversion of four composite resins with different compositions (Durafill VS® - Heraeus-Kulzer, Tetric Ceram® - Ivoclar/Vivadent, Filtek™ Supreme XT - 3M ESPE™ e Aelite™ LS Packable - Bisco), using differential scanning calorimetry. Materials and Methods: A stainless steel matrix was used to prepare 48 cylindrical composite test samples (n=6), measuring 3 mm in diameter and 1 mm in thickness. The samples were photoactivated using a halogen lamp (Optilux™ 500 - Demetron/Kerr) and three different generations of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) (LEC-470 I - MMOptics, Radii Plus - SDI and Ultra-Lume™ LED 5 - Ultradent). After removal of the matrix, each sample was weighed and hermetically sealed in an aluminum pan and analyzed. The amount of heat liberated by thermopolymerisation of residual monomers after photoactivation was measured in Joules/gram (J/g). The data were submitted to Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test (P ≤ 0.002) and the Tukey test (P < 0.05). Results: The Ultra-Lume™ LED 5 was superior on degree of conversion for all resins. The Radii Plus was equal to the Ultra-Lume™ LED 5, except for the resin Tetric Ceram® , were the Optilux™ 500 was superior. The LEC-470 I was inferior for the conversion of all resins. Conclusion: The study proves the importance of the compatibility of the different photoinitiators in resin composites with the different light sources.

Item Description

0970-9290
1998-3603
10.4103/0970-9290.94670