The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 8 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2007 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Effectiveness of Second-generation Light-emitting Diode (LED) Light Curing Units

Fabrício Aulo Ogliari, Ulisses Bastos Campregher, Susana Maria Werner Samuel, Carmen Beatriz Borges Fortes, Alberth David Correa Medina, Fabricio Mezzomo Collares

Citation Information : Ogliari FA, Campregher UB, Samuel SM, Fortes CB, Medina AD, Collares FM. Effectiveness of Second-generation Light-emitting Diode (LED) Light Curing Units. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007; 8 (2):35-42.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-8-2-35

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 00-02-2007

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2007; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of three commercially available light emitting diode (LED) light curing units (LCU) (Elipar FreeLight - 3M ESPE; UltraLume LED2 - Ultradent; and Single V - BioArt) for polymerizing Z250-A3 composite (3M ESPE) using Knoop hardness, polymerization depth, and flexural strength properties.

Methods and Materials

The XL 2500 (3M ESPE) LCU, which is a conventional halogen unit, was used as a control. In all cases the curing time was 20 seconds. Hardness was determined 24 hours after composite cure for 10 samples of 8 mm diameter and 2 mm height for each LCU tested. Samples were stored dry in a lightproof container prior to testing. The depth of cure of the composite was measured immediately after composite polymerization for each LCU using three samples 4 mm in diameter and 6 mm in height. Flexural strength was determined for five samples 24 hours after immersion in distilled water at 37°C. Each sample measured 25 mm in length, 2 mm in width, and 2 mm in height for each LCU tested.

Conclusion

The results were treated statistically for comparison of the LCUs. In all cases the results obtained by LED LCUs were not different or were higher than a conventional halogen LCU.

Clinical Significance

Second generation LED LCUs were as effective as/or more effective than a halogen LCU for polymerization of the used composite. The present study shows second generation LEDs have the potential to replace halogen LCUs.

Citation

Campregher UB, Samuel SMW, Fortes CBB, Medina ADC, Collares FMC, Ogliari FA. Effectiveness of Second-generation Light-emitting Diode (LED) Light Curing Units. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007 February;(8)2:035-042.


PDF Share
  1. Polymerization of composite resins: argon laser vs conventional light. Oper Dent 1998;23:87-93.
  2. Polymerization contraction and conversion of light-curing bisGMA-based methacrylate resins. Biomaterials 1993;14(11):871-875.
  3. Depth of cure of radiation-activated composite restorativesinfluence of shade and opacity. J Oral Rehabil 1995;22:337-342.
  4. Water sorption and solubility of resin-based materials following inadequate polymerization by a visible-light curing system. J Oral Rehabil 1989;16:57-61.
  5. Irradiance of visible light-curing units and voltage variation effects. J Am Dent Assoc 1987;115:442-445.
  6. Wear and marginal breakdown of composites with various degrees of cure. J Dent Res 1997;76(8):1508-1516.
  7. Effect of excitation energy on dentine bond strength and composite properties. J Dent 1994;22(3):175-181.
  8. Effects of light-curing time on the cytotoxicity of a restorative resin composite applied to an immortalized odontoblast-cell line. Oper Dent 2003;28(4):365-370.
  9. Cytotoxic effects of packable and nonpackable dental composites. Dent Mater 2003;19(5):382-392.
  10. Influence of curing tip distance on resin composite knoop hardness number, using three different light curing units. Oper Dent 2003;28(3):315-320.
  11. Effect of light intensity on polymerization of light-cured composite resins. Dent Mater J 1994;13(2):198-205.
  12. Effect of light intensity and exposure duration on cure of resin composite. Oper Dent 1994;19(1):26-32.
  13. Evaluating intensity output of curing lights in private practice. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;25:992-996.
  14. Semiconductor Devices Explained: Using Active Simulation. Baffins Lane: Wiley; 2000.
  15. Blue light emitting diodes—an alternative method of light curing? [letter] Br. Dent. J 1995;178:169.
  16. Physics of semiconductor devices. New York: Wiley, 1981.
  17. Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Polymerisation of Dental Composites: Flexural Properties and Polymerisation Potential. Biomaterials 2000;21(13):1379-1385.
  18. Thermal emission by different light-curing units. Oper Dent 2003;28(3):260-266.
  19. The effect of different light-curing units on fatigue behavior and degree of conversion of a resin composite. Dent Mater 2005;21(7):608-615.
  20. Depth of cure and surface microhardness of composite resin cured with blue LED curing lights. Dental Materials 2004;20:364-369.
  21. Analysis of the degree of conversion of LED and halogen lights using micro-Raman spectroscopy. Oper Dent 2004;29(5):571-577.
  22. Thermal risks from LED- and high-intensity QTH-curing units during polymerization of dental resins. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2005 15; 72(2):260-267.
  23. Depth of cure of radiation-activated materials. Effect of mould material and cavity size, J Dent 1993;21:305-311.
  24. Mechanical properties of materials. In: Phillip's science of dental materials, 11th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 2003.
  25. A comparison of four modes of evaluating depth of cure of light-activated composites. J Den Res 1987;66:727-30.
  26. Factors affecting the quantity of remaining double bonds in restorative resin polymers. Scand J Dent Res 1982;90:490-496.
  27. Molar extinction coefficients and the photon absorption efficiency of dental photoinitiators and light curing units. J Dent. 2005; 33(6):525-532.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.