Influence of curing tip distance on resin composite Knoop hardness number,using three different light curing units

This in vitro study evaluated the influence of curing tip distance on the Knoop Hardness Number (KHN) of a resin composite when using three different light curing units: (1) a halogen light (XL 1500 curing unit-3M), (2) a "softstart-polymerization" (Elipar Trilight curing in an exponential mode-ESPE) and (3) a PAC (Apolo 95E curing unit-DMD). The resin composite, Filtek Z250 (3M), was cured by these curing units at three light-tip distances from the resin composite: 0 mm, 6 mm and 12 mm. The resin composite specimens were flattened to their middle portion and submitted to 18 KHN measurements perspecimen. The results showed that for the Elipar Trilight unit, the hardness of the resin composite decreased as the light tip distance increased. The XL 1500 unit presented a significant decrease in hardness as the depth of cure of the resin composite increased. Apolo 95E caused a decrease in the resin composite hardness values when the depth of cure and light tip distance increased.     

Halogen and LED light curing of composite: temperature increase and Knoop hardness

This study assessed the Knoop hardness and temperature increase provided by three light curing units when using (1) the manufacturers’ recommended times of photo-activation and (2) standardizing total energy density. One halogen – XL2500 (3M/ESPE) – and two light-emitting diode (LED) curing units – Freelight (3M/ESPE) and Ultrablue IS (DMC) – were used. A type-K thermocouple registered the temperature change produced by the composite photo-activation in a mold. Twenty-four hours after the photo-activation procedures, the composite specimens were submitted to a hardness test. Both temperature increase and hardness data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey’s test (5% significance). Using the first set of photo-activation conditions, the halogen unit produced a statistically higher temperature increase than did both LED units, and the Freelight LED resulted in a lower hardness than did the other curing units. When applying the second set of photo-activation conditions, the two LED units produced statistically greater temperature increase than did the halogen unit, whereas there were no statistical differences in hardness among the curing units.     

The Knoop hardness of a composite resin polymerized with different curing lights and different modes

AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare the surface hardness of a hybrid composite resin polymerized with different curing lights. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Two 3.0 mm thick composite resin discs were polymerized in a prepared natural tooth mold using: (1) a conventional quartz-tungsten halogen light (QTH- Spectrum 800); (2) a high-intensity halogen light, Elipar Trilight (TL)-standard/exponential mode; (3) a high-intensity halogen light, Elipar Highlight (HL)-standard/soft-start mode; (4) a light-emitting diode, Elipar Freelight (LED); and (5) a plasma-arc curing light, Virtuoso (PAC). Exposure times were 40 seconds for the halogen and LED lights, and three and five seconds for the PAC light. Following polymerization, the Knoop hardness was measured at the bottom and the top surfaces of the discs. RESULTS: Significant differences were found between top and bottom Knoop Hardness number (KHN) values for all lights. The hardness of the top and bottom surfaces of both specimens cured by the PAC light was significantly lower than the other lights. No significant hardness differences were observed between the remaining curing units at the top of the 2.0 mm specimens. Significant differences were found between the LED and two modes of HL on the bottom surfaces. For the 3.0 mm thick samples, while significant differences were noted between LED and TL standard mode and between the two TL curing modes on the top, significant differences were only observed between QTH and the standard modes of TL and HL at the bottom.     

Influence of placement techniques on Vickers and Knoop hardness of class II composite resin restorations.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the influence of two placement techniques on Knoop and Vickers hardness of class II cavities restored using packable (A.L.E.R.T., Solitaire 2, SureFil) and conventional microfilled and hybrid (Filtek A110 and Z250, respectively) resin composites. METHODS: Fifty standardized class II cavities (5 x 3 x 1.5 mm3) were prepared in human premolars. They were divided into ten groups (n = 5) and restored according to each resin composite material (A.L.E.R.T., Solitaire 2, SureFil, Filtek A110 and Z250) and placement technique (incremental or bulk). After storage in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 24 h, they were thermal cycled (700 cycles/5-55 degrees C, 1 min dwell time) and sectioned longitudinally. One section from each specimen was embedded and polished for Knoop and Vickers hardness measurements. Sixteen indentations were performed for each restoration, eight on the occlusal and eight on the cervical surfaces. RESULTS: Results were submitted to ANOVA and demonstrated that all materials presented lower hardness values at the cervical surfaces when the bulk placement technique was employed, when compared to the occlusal surfaces (p< 0.001) whereas the same did not occur with the incremental technique. Pearson's correlation test demonstrated a positive correlation between Vickers and Knoop hardness numbers. SIGNIFICANCE: The use of bulk placement technique resulted in lower values of hardness at the cervical surfaces of class II restorations. Values obtained using Knoop hardness test showed a high correlation with Vickers hardness measurements.     

Effect of light curing tip distance and resin shade on microhardness of a hybrid resin composite

Resin composite shades and resin composite polymerization performed with a distanced light tip are factors that can affect polymerization effectiveness. This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the influence of curing tip distance and resin shade on the microhardness of a hybrid resin composite (Z250-3M ESPE). Forty-five resin composite specimens were randomly prepared and divided into nine experimental groups (n = 5): three curing tip distances (2 mm, 4 mm, and 8 mm) and three resin shades (A1, A3.5, and C2). All samples were polymerized with a continuous output at 550 mW/cm(2). After 24 hours, Knoop microhardness measurements were obtained on the top and bottom surfaces of the sample, with a load of 25 grams for 10 seconds. Five indentations were performed on each surface of each sample. Results showed that bottom surface samples light-cured at 2 mm and 4 mm presented significantly higher hardness values than samples light-cured at 8 mm. The resin shade A1 presented higher hardness values and was statistically different from C2. The resin shade A3.5 did not present statistical differences from A1 and C2. For the top surface, there were no statistical differences among the curing tip distances. For all experimental conditions, the top surface showed higher hardness values than the bottom surface. It was concluded that light curing tip distance and resin shade are important factors to be considered for obtaining adequate polymerization.     

Effect of distance from curing light tip to restoration surface on depth of cure of composite resin

AIMS: While light-activating composite resins, the light tip may not always be close to the surface of the restoration. This may be intentional in an attempt to create a ramp cure. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of a range of separation distances between the light tip and the restoration surface on the depth of composite cure for different types of light-curing units with a broad range of outputs. METHODS: Three halogen light units, one plasma arc-curing (PAC) light unit and two light-emitting diode (LED) curing lights in clinical use were tested, and a total of 570 restorations cured in a two-part human tooth model at separations ranging from 0 to 15 mm. The tooth was disassembled and depth of cure determined using the scrape test ISO 4049. Light intensity was also measured at each separation distance for each light. RESULTS: The depth of cure was generally found to decrease as the separation distance increased for all lights at the various cure times. However, the effect of increasing the separation distance was less than anticipated. The depth of cure was also related to the light output. CONCLUSIONS: Depth of composite cure was directly related to intensity and duration of light exposure and inversely related to distance of the light source from the surface for halogen and plasma lights. However, the effect of increasing the separation distance up to 15 mm was less than expected. Altering the separation distance in order to modify the polymerisation characteristics is unlikely to be effective.     

Relative curing degree of polyacid-modified and conventional resin composites determined by surface Knoop hardness.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to investigate the relative curing degree at a depth of 2 mm of several polyacid-modified composites (PAM-Cs) as a function of shade. METHODS: The Knoop hardness of the irradiated top and non-irradiated bottom surfaces of 2 mm thick samples of the PAM-Cs Hytac, F2000, Glasiosite, Dyract, Dyract AP, and Compoglass F and of the resin composites Z100, Herculite Enamel XRV, and Durafill VS, were determined for shades A2 and A4. RESULTS: The top and bottom hardness of F2000 and Glasiosite ranged between that of the two composites Herculite and Z100. Compoglass, Dyract and Dyract AP had a lower top and bottom hardness than the hybrid composites, but higher than that of the microfilled composite Durafill. The top hardness of Hytac compared with that of the first group, whereas the bottom hardness compared with the second group. The bottom-to-top KHN ratio reflecting the relative curing degree at a depth of 2 mm was less than 80% for the two shades of Hytac and Compoglass as well as for the A4 shade of Dyract AP and Herculite. SIGNIFICANCE: A hard top surface of a PAM-C is not an indication of adequate in depth polymerization. Shade A2 results in significantly greater values for the curing degree compared to shade A4, the effect depending quantitatively on the formulation of the material. Some formulations of PAM-C do not reach an adequate curing degree at a depth of 2 mm so that it is recommended to apply the incremental technique even in box-only cavities with layers of maximum 2 mm.     

Evaluation of depth of cure and Knoop hardness in a dental composite photo-activated using different methods

The aim of this study was to evaluate the depth of cure and Knoop hardness in the P60 composite resin photo-activated using different methods. A bipartite brass matrix (3 mm in diameter X 11 mm in height) was filled with the composite and photo-activation was performed using continuous light, exponential light, intermittent light, plasma arc curing (PAC) or light-emitting diodes (LED). After opening the matrix, the uncured material was removed with a steel spatula and the polymerized composite was measured using a pachymeter. The specimens were then included in self-curing acrylic resin and worn longitudinally and the hardness was measured on the surface and at depths of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 mm. The data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's test (5%). The results showed that the depth of cure was higher with the intermittent light, followed by continuous light, exponential light, PAC and LED methods. Up to a depth of 2 mm, all methods revealed similar hardness values, but there were differences between them at other depths, at which LED demonstrated the lowest values followed by PAC.     

Effect of LED curing modes on cusp deflection and hardness of composite restorations

This in vitro study measured cusp deflection associated with MOD resin composite restorations in maxillary premolars with different curing light modes. Soft-start polymerization may reduce cusp deflection by reducing polymerization shrinkage stress. Forty maxillary premolars were mounted in stone and slot MOD cavities were prepared. The teeth were randomized into four groups: Group A--cavities were etched, bonded and restored with two increments of Z-100 composite. Each increment was cured with an LED curing light (fast curing mode). Group B--similar to Group A except that the LED curing light with pulse curing mode was used. Group C--similar to Group A except that the LED curing light with stepped curing mode was used. Group D--a visible curing light was used for curing the composite. The distance between the indexed cusp tips was measured before the restorations were completed and five minutes after, 24 hours after and two weeks after completion of the restorations. The mean contraction of the cusps in microm at five minutes, 24 hours and two weeks, respectively, for each group was A: 25.4, 16.2 and 8.2, B: 6.4, 3.4 and 2.2, C: 11.6, 7.0 and 4.4, D: 33.0, 21.6 and 15.8. Group D resulted in the highest deflection, Group A was intermediate and Groups B and C were the lowest. Ten samples of the composite for each group with 2-mm thickness were prepared for the Vickers hardness test. No difference among the samples was found.     

Evaluation of curing light distance on resin composite microhardness and polymerization

This study evaluated the influence of the curing tip distance on cure depth of a resin composite by measuring Vickers microhardness and determining the degree of conversion by using FT-Raman spectroscopy. The light curing units used were halogen (500mW/cm2) and LED (900mW/cm2) at a conventional intensity and an Argon laser at 250mW. The exposure time was 40 seconds for the halogen light, 20 seconds for the LED and 20 and 30 seconds for the Argon laser. The curing tip distances of 0, 3, 6 and 9 mm were used and controlled via the use of metal rings. The composite was placed in a black matrix in one increment at a thickness of 1 mm to 4 mm. The values of microhardness and the degree of conversion were analyzed separately by ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) and Tukey test, with a significance level set at 5%. Correlations were analyzed using the Pearson test. The results obtained conclude that greater tip distances produced a decrease in microhardness and degree of conversion values, while increasing the resin thickness decreased the microhardness and degree of conversion values. A higher correlation between microhardness and the degree of conversion was shown. This study suggests that the current light curing units promote a similar degree of conversion and microhardness, provided that the resin is not thicker than 1 mm and the light source is at a maximum distance of 3 mm from the resin surface.     

The effect of surface treatment on the Knoop hardness of Dicor.

One advantage cited for the use of Dicor over other ceramic materials is a reported Knoop hardness comparable to human enamel. However, when fabricating dental restorations, a Dicor glass-ceramic casting generally is subjected to several different surface treatments because of processing, esthetic, and functional requirements. Therefore, this study compared the Knoop hardness of Dicor specimens under three conditions: (1) cerammed, (2) cerammed and shaded, and (3) sectioned to reveal internal material. Knoop hardness differences between groups were significant (P less than or equal to .05). The cerammed surface was the hardest; it was harder than human enamel. Shaded specimens had a surface hardness comparable to dental porcelain. However, the internal glass-ceramic material, located beneath the shading porcelain and cerammed surface, had a Knoop hardness slightly higher than that of human enamel.     

Effect of light-curing methods on resin cement Knoop hardness at different depths

This study evaluated, using Knoop hardness test, the polymerization depth of Rely-X dual-cured resin cement activated by chemical reaction alone (control group) or by chemical/physical mode with light curing through a 1.5-mm-thick ceramic layer (HeraCeram). Bovine incisors had their buccal surface flattened and hybridized. On this surface, a rubber mould (5 mm diameter; 1 mm high) was bulk filled with cement. Either a polyester strip or a 1.5-mm-thick disc of the veneering material was seated over this set. Light curing was performed with either conventional halogen light (QTH; XL2500) for 40 s, light-emitting diode (LED; Ultrablue Is) for 40 s or xenon plasma arc (PAC; Apollo 95E) for 3 s. In a control group, cement setting occurred by chemical reaction alone. After storage dry in dark (24 h/37 masculineC), the specimens (n=5) were sectioned for hardness (KHN) measurements at three depths in a microhardness tester (50 gf load/15 s). Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's test (a = 0.05). Rely-X cement presented higher Knoop hardness values when the QTH and LED LCUs were used, compared to the control group and PAC. Light curing with PAC resulted in lower hardness compared to the control group. Cement hardness was significantly lower in deeper regions.     

Effect of different initial light intensity by the soft-start photoactivation on the bond strength and Knoop hardness of a dental composite

This study evaluated the bond strength (push-out method) and Knoop hardness of Z250 composite resin, photoactivated with XL 2500 curing unit, using different protocols: continuous mode (700mW/cm(2) for 20s) (CO); soft-start (50 mW/cm(2) for 5 s, followed by 700 mW/cm(2) for 15 s) (SS1); soft-start (100 mW/cm(2) for 5 s, followed by 700 mW/cm(2) for 15 s) (SS2); soft-start (150 mW/cm(2) for 5 s, followed by 700mW/cm(2) for 15s) (SS3); soft-start (200mW/cm(2) for 5s, followed by 700mW/cm(2) for 15s) (SS4); soft-start (250mW/cm(2) for 5 s, followed by 700 mW/cm(2) for 15 s) (SS5); soft-start (300 mW/cm(2) for 5 s, followed by 700 mW/cm(2) for 15 s) (SS6). For the push-out test, the specimens were tested in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. For the hardness test, the specimens were polished for the hardness measurements, using a 50 g load for 15 s. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's test (alpha=5%). The results of bond strength showed that the SS3 group obtained the highest bond strength when compared to the CO group. There were no significant differences among the other modes in relation to the other groups. Regarding the other results in hardness, there were no significant differences among the groups in the surface region and up to 4 mm depth.     

Third-generation vs a second-generation LED curing light: effect on Knoop microhardness

Third-generation light-emitting diode (LED) curing lights use several different types of LEDs within the light to deliver a broader spectral output compared with the narrower spectral output of second-generation curing lights. This study determined the benefits of this broader spectral output. A third-generation LED curing light was modified so that the 4 peripheral LEDs, which provide the lower wavelengths, could be turned on or off, allowing the light to be used as a third- or a second-generation LED curing light. Twelve composites of A2 and lighter shades were packed into molds 2 mm deep with an internal diameter of 12 mm, and then irradiated for 20 seconds. A laboratory-grade spectroradiometer was used to ensure that all the specimens received the same irradiance and total energy (16.82 J/cm2) from the curing light in both the second- and third-generation modes. The results showed the benefits of using a broader spectrum third-generation LED curing light. This light produced composites that were as hard as when the narrower spectrum second-generation LED curing light was used (P < or = .01). In 7 of the 12 resin composites, the top surface was harder when the third-generation LED curing light was used (P < or = .01).     

Effect of inhomogeneity of light from light curing units on the surface hardness of composite resin

This study investigated the characteristics of output light from different types of light curing units, and their effects on polymerization of light-activated composite resin. Three quartz-tungsten-halogen lamps, one plasma arc lamp, and one LED light curing unit were used. Intensity distribution of light emitted from the light guide tip was measured at 1.0-mm intervals across the guide tip. Distribution of Knoop hardness number on the surface of resin irradiated with the light curing units was also measured. For all units, inhomogeneous distribution of light intensity across the guide tip was observed. Minimum light intensity values were 19-80% of the maximum values. In terms of surface hardness, inhomogeneous distribution was also observed for the materials irradiated with the tested units. Minimum values were 53-92% of the maximum values. Our results indicated that markedly inhomogeneous light emitted from light curing unit could result in inhomogeneous polymerization in some areas of the restoration below the light guide tip.     

Effect of light curing units on marginal adaptation and hardness of Class II composite resin restorations

AIMS: The aim of this study was to test the influence of different curing protocols on dentin marginal adaptation and the hardness of two composites. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Three light-curing-units (LCUs): Quartz-Tungsten-Halogen (QTH: 541 mW/cm2), Argon-Ion-Laser (AL: 277 mW/cm2), and Plasma-Arc-Curing (PAC: 1818 mW/cm2) and two composites FiltekZ250 (F) and Tetric Ceram HB (TC) were tested. Sixty standardized "vertical-slot-Class II-cavities" were prepared at the mesial surface of bovine incisors and divided into six groups (n=10). Composites were placed using the Single Bond adhesive system and cured in 2 mm increments according to the manufacturers' instructions. After polishing, epoxy replicas were processed for scanning electron microscopy (SEM) marginal adaptation analysis at 500x magnification. The specimens were then sectioned transversally to the dental long axis, embedded in polyester resin, then polished and submitted to the Knoop hardness test at gingival and occlusal portions of the restoration. Data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (p=0.05). RESULTS: The gap margins ranged between 4.3 to 5.8 microm, and no statistically significant differences were revealed in marginal adaptation for LCUs or for composites (p>0.05). Location influenced hardness (p=0.01). The occlusal portion presented significantly higher KHN than the gingival portion for all composite-LCU combinations. Regardless of the LCU used, TC produced statistically significant lower hardness values (ranging between 82.8 to 110.7 KHN) than F (ranging between 105.9 to 117.3 KHN). CONCLUSIONS: Hardness and gap formation were not dependent on the LCUs tested in this study. Different resin composite was found to be a significant factor with regards to hardness but not gap formation.