The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 20 , ISSUE 4 ( April, 2019 ) > List of Articles


The Effect of Ceramic Thickness on the Surface Microhardness of Dual-cured and Light-cured Resin Cements

Leila Pishevar, Zohre Ashtijoo, Mahsa Khavvaji

Keywords : Ceramic, Resin cement, Surface microhardness

Citation Information : Pishevar L, Ashtijoo Z, Khavvaji M. The Effect of Ceramic Thickness on the Surface Microhardness of Dual-cured and Light-cured Resin Cements. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019; 20 (4):466-470.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2540

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-08-2014

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; The Author(s).


Aim: This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of ceramic thickness on the surface hardness of light-cured and dual-cured resin cements. Materials and methods: Forty disk-like specimens of the dual-cured resin cement and twenty-four specimens of the light-cured resin cement were prepared (with 6 mm diameter and 1mm thickness). The samples were light-cure d for 40 seconds through three different ceramic disks (2 mm, 3 mm and 4 mm). Control specimens from each group were directly polymerized under a Mylar strip. In the control group of the dual-cured resin cement, the cement setting was realized by chemical reaction alone. After storing dry in darkness (24 hours, 37°C), the surface hardness of the specimens was measured using the Vickers microhardness test. Data were statistically analyzed using a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by the LSD's test (p <0.05). Results: BisCem resin cement which had been dual-cured under the 4 mm thickness ceramic with the 4.3 Vickers hardness, showed minimum surface microhardness, while the light-cured resin cement which had been directly activated in the control group with the 51.8 Vickers hardness value exhibited the maximum surface microhardness. So, BisCem dual polymerized control specimens had significantly higher hardness values in comparison to the chemically polymerized and indirectly activated ones (p <0.001). Conclusion: An increase in the thickness of ceramic could decrease the hardness of the resin cement. An overlying ceramic thickness of 3 mm and above was found to adversely affect the polymerization of the LC and DC resin cement and it was considered as the clinical threshold. In addition, using only the self-cured mode in the dual-cured resin cement was not sufficient for achieving the optimum surface microhardness. clinical significant: Adequate polymerization of resin cement is essential for the optimal mechanical properties and clinical performance. It affects by increasing the thickness of ceramic restorations.

PDF Share
  1. Scotti N, Comba A, Cadenaro M, et al. Effect of Lithium Disilicate Veneers of Different Thickness on the Degree of Conversion and Microhardness of a Light-Curing and a Dual-Curing Cement. Int J Prosthodont 2016;29(4):384-388.
  2. Tian T, Tsoi JK-H, Matinlinna JP, et al. Aspects of bonding between resin luting cements and glass ceramic materials. Dent Mater 2014;30(7):e147-e162.
  3. Öztürk E, Bolay Ş, Hickel R, et al. Shear bond strength of porcelain laminate veneers to enamel, dentine and enamel–dentine complex bonded with different adhesive luting systems. J Dent 2013;41(2):97-105.
  4. Meng X, Yoshida K, Atsuta M. Influence of ceramic thickness on mechanical properties and polymer structure of dual-cured resin luting agents. Dent Mater 2008;24(5):594-599.
  5. Lee IB, An W, Chang J, et al. Influence of ceramic thickness and curing mode on the polymerization shrinkage kinetics of dual-cured resin cements. Dent Mater 2008;24(8):1141-1147.
  6. Vohra F, Al-Rifaiy M, Al Qahtani M. Factors Affecting Resin Polymerization of Bonded All Ceramic Restorations. Review of Literature. J Dow Univ Health Sc 2013;7(2).
  7. Kilinc E, Antonson S, Hardigan PC, et al. The effect of ceramic restoration shade and thickness on the polymerization of light-and dual-cure resin cements. Operative Dent 2011;36(6):661-669.
  8. El-Mowafy O, Rubo M, El-Badrawy W. Hardening of new resin cements cured through a ceramic inlay. Operative Dent 1999;24:38-44.
  9. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Crispin BJ. Dental luting agents: a review of the current literature. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80(3):280-301.
  10. Hackman S, Pohjola R, Rueggeberg F. Depths of cure and effect of shade using pulse-delay and continuous exposure photo-curing techniques. Operative Dent 2002;27(6):593-599.
  11. Caughman WF, Chan DC, Rueggeberg FA. Curing potential of dual-polymerizable resin cements in simulated clinical situations. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85(5):479-484.
  12. Kesrak P, Leevailoj C. Surface hardness of resin cement polymerized under different ceramic materials. Int J Dent 2012;2012.
  13. Cardash HS, Baharav H, Pilo R, et al. The effect of porcelain color on the hardness of luting composite resin cement. J Prosthet Dent 1993;69(6):620-623.
  14. Bagis Y, Rueggeberg F. The effect of post-cure heating on residual, unreacted monomer in a commercial resin composite. Dent Mater 2000;16(4):244-247.
  15. Uctasli S, Hasanreisoglu U, Wilson H. The attenuation of radiation by porcelain and its effect on polymerization of resin cements. J Oral Rehab 1994;21(5):565-575.
  16. Braga R, Cesar P, Gonzaga C. Mechanical properties of resin cements with different activation modes. J Oral Rehab 2002;29(3):257-262.
  17. Fonseca RG, Cruz CAdS, Adabo GL. The influence of chemical activation on hardness of dual-curing resin cements. Brazilian Oral Res 2004;18(3):228-232.
  18. Bansal R, Taneja S, Kumari M. Effect of ceramic type, thickness, and time of irradiation on degree of polymerization of dual–cure resin cement. J Conservative Dent 2016;19(5):414.
  19. Lee I-B, Um C-M. Thermal analysis on the cure speed of dual cured resin cements under porcelain inlays. J Oral Rehab 2001;28(2): 186-197.
  20. Meng X, yoshida K, atsuta M. Hardness development of dual-cured resin cements through different thicknesses of ceramics. Dent Mater J 2006;25(1):132-137.
  21. Soares C, Silva N, Fonseca R. Influence of the feldspathic ceramic thickness and shade on the microhardness of dual resin cement. Operative Dent 2006;31(3):384-389.
  22. Piva E, Correr-Sobrinho L, Sinhoreti MAC, et al. Influence of energy density of different light sources on Knoop hardness of a dual-cured resin cement. J Appl Oral Sci 2008;16(3):189-193.
  23. Hasegawa EA, Boyer DB, Chan DC. Hardening of dual-cured cements under composite resin inlays. J Prosthet Dent 1991;66(2): 187-192.
  24. Watts D, Cash A, Chauhan J, et al. Variables influencing hardness development in dual-cure composite luting materials. J Dent Res 1994;73:801.
  25. Pazin MC, Moraes RR, Gonçalves LS, et al. Effects of ceramic thickness and curing unit on light transmission through leucite-reinforced material and polymerization of dual-cured luting agent. J Oral Sci 2008;50(2):131-136.
  26. Ilie N, Hickel R. Correlation between ceramics translucency and polymerization efficiency through ceramics. Dent Mater 2008;24(7):908-914.
  27. Strydom C. Curing lights–the effects of clinical factors on intensity and polymerisation. SADJ: Journal of the South African Dental Association= Tydskrif Van Die Suid-Afrikaanse Tandheelkundige Vereniging 2002;57(5):181-186.
  28. Zhang X, Wang F. Hardness of resin cement cured under different thickness of lithium disilicate-based ceramic. Chinese Medical Journal. 2011;124(22):3762-3767.
  29. Lee J-W, Cha H-S, Lee J-H. Curing efficiency of various resin-based materials polymerized through different ceramic thicknesses and curing time. J Adv Prosthodont 2011;3(3):126-131.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.