Show simple item record

Effect of a Light-Emitting Diode on Composite Polymerization Shrinkage and Hardness

dc.contributor.authorNakfoor, Bryanen_US
dc.contributor.authorYaman, Peteren_US
dc.contributor.authorDennison, Joseph B.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHerrero, Albertoen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T21:52:49Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T21:52:49Z
dc.date.issued2005-03en_US
dc.identifier.citationNAKFOOR, BRYAN; YAMAN, PETER; DENNISON, JOSEPH; HERRERO, ALBERTO (2005). "Effect of a Light-Emitting Diode on Composite Polymerization Shrinkage and Hardness." Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 17(2): 110-116. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/74916>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1496-4155en_US
dc.identifier.issn1708-8240en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/74916
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=16036127&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractPurpose: : This study evaluated the effect of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) on polymerization shrinkage and bottom-to-top hardness ratios of composites. Materials and Methods : Six LEDs (Elipar FreeLight, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA; Versalux, Centrix, Shelton, CT, USA; Ultra-Lume LED2, Ultradent, South Jordan, UT, USA; Zap LED only, CMS-Dental/Soft-Core Texas, North Richland Hills, TX, USA; Zap dual light; and L.E.Demetron I, Kerr Manufacturing Inc., Orange, CA, USA) and a quartz-tungsten-halogen (QTH) light (Optilux 501, Kerr Manufacturing Inc.) were tested. Ten specimens each of a microhybrid (Point 4, Kerr Manufacturing, Inc.) and a hybrid (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) composite, measuring 2 mm thick by 5 mm in diameter, were polymerized using each of the lights. Linear shrinkage was recorded using a contactless displacement instrument. Ten specimens were also polymerized with each light to determine the Knoop hardness number (KHN) at the top and bottom surfaces. Results : For the microhybrid, Zap dual light had the least volumetric shrinkage 2.08% (± 0.33) and Elipar FreeLight had the highest 3.02% (± 0.73). There was no significant difference ( p < .05) in shrinkage for the LEDs when compared with the Optilux 501. The hybrid showed the least amount of shrinkage with the L.E.Demetron I, 1.42% (± 0.12), and the greatest with the Zap dual light, 2.47% (± 0.31). The Ultra-Lume LED2 ( p < .05) and Zap LED and dual light ( p < .001) had significantly greater shrinkage than did the Optilux 501. Zap LED had the lowest depth of cure with a bottom KHN of 11.46 (± 2.71) and 33.62 (± 3.57) for the microhybrid and hybrid, respectively. The L.E.Demetron I had the highest bottom hardness value for the microhybrid, with a value of 40.65 (± 1.50). The Optilux 501 had the highest bottom hardness value for the hybrid, with a value of 62.03 (± 0.82). The Zap LED and dual light and Versalux lights had significantly lower bottom-to-top hardness ratios than did the QTH ( p < .001) with the microhybrid. Conclusions : There was no statistically significant difference in shrinkage for the microhybrid with any of the lights tested. The hybrid, however, showed significantly less shrinkage with the halogen compared with the Ultra-Lume LED2 and Zap LED and dual light. All LEDs had equal or lower bottom hardness values than did the QTH, except for L.E.Demetron I with the microhybrid.en_US
dc.format.extent299470 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.rights2005 BC Decker Incen_US
dc.titleEffect of a Light-Emitting Diode on Composite Polymerization Shrinkage and Hardnessen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistryen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationum* Fourth-year student, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationum† University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI, USAen_US
dc.identifier.pmid16036127en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/74916/1/j.1708-8240.2005.tb00096.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1708-8240.2005.tb00096.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistryen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCraig RG, Powers JM. Restorative dental materials 11th Ed. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby, 2002.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJorgensen KD, Asmussen E, Shimokobe H. Enamel damages caused by contracting restorative resins. Scand J Dent Res 1975; 2: 120 – 122.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUno S, Asmussen A. Marginal adaptation of a restorative resin polymerized at reduced rate. Scand J Dent Res 1991; 5: 440 – 444.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCondon JR, Ferrancane JL. Assessing the effect of composite formulation on polymerization stress. J Am Dent Assoc 2000; 4: 497 – 503.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilson N, Burke F, Mjor I. Reasons for placement and replacement of restorations of direct restorative materials by a select group of practitioners in the United Kingdom. Quintessence Int 1997; 38: 245 – 248.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDennison JB, Yaman P, Seir R, Hamilton JC. Effect on variable light intensity on composite shrinkage. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 5: 499 – 505.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSakaguchi RL, Berge HX. Reduced light energy density decreases post-gel contraction while maintaining degree of conversion in composites. J Dent 1998; 1: 695 – 700.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFeilzer AJ, Dooren LH, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Influence of light intensity on polymerization shrinkage and integrity of restoration-cavity interface. Eur J Oral Sci 1995; 5: 322 – 326.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYoshikawa T, Burrow MF, Tagami J. A light curing method for improving marginal sealing and cavity wall adaptation of resin composite restorations. Dent Mater 2001; 4: 359 – 366.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO'Brien W. Dental materials and their selection. 3rd Ed. Chicago: Quintessence, 2002.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePires JA, Cvitko E, Denehy GE, Swift EJ Jr. Effects of curing tip distance on light intensity and composite resin microhardness. Quintessence Int 1993; 7: 517 – 521.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFerracane JL, Mitchem JC, Condon JR, Todd R. Wear and marginal breakdown of composites with various degrees of cure. J Dent Res 1997; 8: 1508 – 1516.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDunn WJ, Bush AC. A comparison of polymerization by light-emitting diode and halogen-based light-curing units. J Am Dent Assoc 2002; 3: 335 – 341.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRueggeberg FA, Caughman WF, Curtis JW, Davis HC. Factors affecting cure at depths within light-activated resin composites. Am J Dent 1993; 2: 91 – 95.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRueggeberg FA, Caughman WF, Curtis JW Jr. Effect of light intensity and exposure duration on cure of resin composite. Oper Dent 1994; 1: 26 – 32.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencede Gee AF, Fielzer AJ, Davidson CL. True linear polymerization shrinkage of unfilled resins and composites determined with a linometer. Dent Mater 1993; 1: 11 – 14.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFielzer AJ, de Gee AJ, Davidson C. Curing contraction of composite and glass ionomer cements. J Prosthet Dent 1988; 59: 297 – 300.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.