The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  25 (2024)
Volume  24 (2023)
Volume  23 (2022)
Volume  22 (2021)
Volume  21 (2020)
Volume  20 (2019)
Volume  19 (2018)
Volume  18 (2017)
Volume  17 (2016)
Volume  16 (2015)
Volume  15 (2014)
Volume  14 (2013)
Volume  13 (2012)
Volume  12 (2011)
Volume  11 (2010)
Volume  10 (2009)
Volume  9 (2008)
Volume  8 (2007)
Volume  7 (2006)
Volume  6 (2005)
Volume  5 (2004)
Volume  4 (2003)
Volume  3 (2002)
Volume  2 (2001)
Volume  1 (1999)
Related articles

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 5 ( September-October, 2011 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluation of the Light Energy Transmission and Bottom/Top Rate in Silorane and Methacrylate-based Composites with Different Photoactivation Protocols

Mário Alexandre Coelho Sinhoreti, Ricardo Danil Guiraldo, Simonides Consani, Rafael Leonardo Xediek Consani, Maysa Penteado de Camargo Bataglia, Ana Paula Piovezan Fugolin, Sandrine Bittencourt Berger, Murilo Baena Lopes, Sandra Kiss Moura

Citation Information : Sinhoreti MA, Guiraldo RD, Consani S, Consani RL, de Camargo Bataglia MP, Fugolin AP, Berger SB, Lopes MB, Moura SK. Evaluation of the Light Energy Transmission and Bottom/Top Rate in Silorane and Methacrylate-based Composites with Different Photoactivation Protocols. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011; 12 (5):361-367.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1060

Published Online: 01-04-2012

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2011; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim

This study investigated the influence of different composite resin organic matrix (methacrylate – Filtek Z350 XT and silorane – Filtek P90) on light energy transmission through the composite and bottom/top rate.

Materials and methods

A light-emitting diode (New Blue Phase), light-curing unit was used with different photoactivation protocols (high-continuous mode – HCM, 1400 mW/cm2 for 20 seconds; low-continuous mode – LCM, 700 mW/cm2 for 40 seconds; and soft-start mode – SSM, 140 mW/cm2 for 5s followed by 39 seconds for 700 mW/cm2). Twenty specimens were prepared for each composite. The light energy transmission through the composite was calculated (n=10). The bottom/top rate of the same specimen was calculated (n=10). The data were compared by Tukey's test in different tests (light energy transmission through the composite and bottom/top rate).

Results

The light energy transmission through the Filtek Z350 XT composite (HCM – 576 mW/cm2, LCM – 238 mW/cm2, SSM – 232 mW/cm2) did not show statistical difference when compared with Filtek P90 composite (HCM – 572 mW/cm2, LCM – 233 mW/cm2, SSM – 230 mW/cm2). The bottom/top rate of the Filtek Z350 XT composite (HCM – 88.98%, LCM – 90.94%, SSM – 89.92%) was statistically higher than that of the Filtek P90 composite (HCM–77.29%, LCM–77.51%, SSM– 77.79%).

Conclusion

Light energy transmission through the composite was not influenced by the use of different dental composite restoratives. However, the bottom/top rate of the composites was influenced by the use of different dental composite restoratives.

Clinical significance

Insufficiently polymerized composite resin may present a large number of problems. For this reason, dental composite resins should have the similar deep surface polymerization as the top surface in dental restorations.

How to cite this article

Guiraldo RD, Consani S, Consani RLX, de Camargo Bataglia MP, Fugolin APP, Berger SB, Lopes MB, Moura SK, Sinhoreti MAC. Evaluation of the Light Energy Transmission and Bottom/Top Rate in Silorane and Methacrylate-based Composites with Different Photoactivation Protocols. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(5):361-367.

PDF Share
  1. Polymerization efficiency of LED curing lights. J Esthet Restor Dent 2002;14(5):286-95.
  2. Shrinkage forces due to polymerization of lightcured dental composite resin in cavities. Polym Test 2010; 29(8):1052-56.
  3. Resin composites in dentistry: The monomer systems. Eur J Oral Sci 1997;105(2):97-116.
  4. Influence of irradiance on the push-out bond strength of composite restorations photoactivated by LED. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008;9(2):89-96.
  5. Halogen and LED light curing of composite: Temperature increase and Knoop hardness. Clin Oral Investig 2006;10(1):66-71.
  6. Quantum yield of conversion of the photoinitiator camphorquinone. Dent Mater 2007; 23(6):655-64.
  7. Polymerization and light-induced heat of dental composites cured with LED and halogen technology. Biomaterials 2003;24(10):1809-20.
  8. Spectral analysis of commercial LED dental curing lights. J Dent Res 2002;81:A-88. (Abst 507).
  9. Performance of two blue light-emittingdiode dental light curing units with distance and irradiationtime. Dent Mater 2004;20(1):72-79.
  10. Effect of sequential versus continuous irradiation of a photoactivated resin composite on shrinkage, viscosity, adhesion, and degree of polymerization. Am J Dent 1998;11(1):17-22.
  11. Developing a more complete understanding of stresses produced in dentalcomposites during polymerization. Dent Mater 2005;21(1):36-42.
  12. Effect of the photoactivation method on polymerization shrinkage of restorative composites. Oper Dent 2002;27(2):192-98.
  13. Effect of various incremental techniques on the marginal adaptation of class II composite resin restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67(1):62-66.
  14. Intrinsic ‘soft-start’ polymerisation shrinkage-kinetics in an acrylate-based resin-composite. Dent Mater 1999;15(1):39-45.
  15. Degree of conversion of composites measured by DTA and FTIR. Dent Mater 2001;17(2):178-83.
  16. Effect of different photoactivation techniques on the bond strength of a dental composite. Braz Dent J 2010;21(3):220-24.
  17. Volker polymerization of cyclic monomers, 8. Synthesis and radical polymerization of hybrid 2-vinylcyclopropanes. Rheinberger. Macromol Rapid Commun 1999;20(1):33-35.
  18. Siloranes in dental composites. Dent Mater 2005;21(1):68-78.
  19. Degree of conversion of Filtek Silorane Adhesive System and Clearfil SE Bond within the hybrid and adhesive layer: An in situ Raman analysis. Dent Mater 2009;25(9):1178-85.
  20. Light energy transmission through composite influenced by material shades. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll 2009; 50(4):183-190.
  21. Comparison of silorane and methacrylatebased composite resins on the curing light transmission. Braz Dent J 2010;21(6):538-42.
  22. Dental filling material comprising vinyl-silane treated fused silica and a binder consisting of the reaction product of bisphenol and glycidyl methacrylate. US Patent 1962;3:066,112.
  23. Light transmission on dental resin composites. Dent Mater 2008;24(5):571-76.
  24. Polymerization of composite resins: Argon laser vs conventional light. Oper Dent 1998; 23(2):87-93.
  25. Some factors influencing the depth of cure of visible light-activated composite resins. Aust Dent J 1990;35(3):213-18.
  26. Curing depth of different shades of a photo-actived prosthetic composite material. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28(7):618-23.
  27. Relationship between shade and depth of cure for light-activated dental composite resins. Dent Mater 1986;2(2):80-84.
  28. Light-curing units, polymerization, and clinical implications. J Adhes Dent 2000; 2(3):167-73.
  29. How filler properties, filler fraction, sample thickness and light source affect light attenuation in particulate filled resin composites. Dent Mater 2005;21(8):721-30.
  30. Effect of the increase of energy density on Knoop hardness of dental composites light-cured by conventional QTH, LED and xenon plasma arc. Braz Dent J 2005;16(3):218-24.
  31. Degree of conversion and temperature rise during polymerization of composite resin samples with blue diodes. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28(6):586-91.
  32. Correlation between hardness and degree conversion during the setting reaction of unfilled dental restorative resins. Dent Mater 1985;1(1):11-14.
  33. Effect of light power density variations on bulk curing properties of dental composites. J Dent 2003;31(3):189-96.
  34. Hardness of a bleaching-shade resin composite polymerized with different light-curing sources. Braz Oral Res 2006;20(4):337-41.
  35. Degree of conversion versus the depth of polymerization of an organically modified ceramic dental restoration composite by fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. J Appl Polym Sci 2007; 104(1):325-30.
  36. Factors affecting cure at depths within light-activated resin composites. Am J Dent 1993;6(2):91-95.
  37. Influence of the power density on the kinetics of photopolymerization and properties of dental composites. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005;72(2):393-400.
  38. Photopolymerization kinetics of multifunctional monomers. Prog Polym Sci 2001;26(4):605-65.
  39. Correlation of bottom-to-top surface microhardness and conversion ratios for variety of resin composite compositions. Oper Dent 2004; 29(6):698-704.
  40. Polymer-based crown and bridge materials 2004.
  41. Depth of cure of radiation-activated composite restoratives influence of shade and opacity. J Oral Rehabil 1995;22(5):337-42.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.