Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 328
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 


 
Table of Contents   
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 22  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 196-200
The effect of curing time by conventional quartz tungsten halogens and new light-emitting diodes light curing units on degree of conversion and microhardness of a nanohybrid resin composite


1 Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla, Thailand
2 Department of Conservative Dentistry; Dental Materials Research Unit (Second Phase), Faculty of Dentistry, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla, Thailand

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Submission01-Nov-2018
Date of Decision19-Mar-2019
Date of Acceptance25-Mar-2019
Date of Web Publication02-May-2019
 

   Abstract 

Background: Little is known about the relationship between the minimal light-curing time required for proper polymerization on various quartz–tungsten–halogen (QTH) and light-emitting diode (LED) light-curing units that have different light intensities.
Aim: To evaluate the effects of curing time by QTH and LED light-curing units on the degree of conversion (DoC) and surface microhardness of a nanohybrid resin composite.
Setting and Design: Experimental design.
Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty cylindrical specimens (4.0 mm in diameter, 2.0 mm thick) of shade A2 resin composite were prepared and polymerized with either QTHs or LEDs for 20 and 40 s. The DoC and the top and bottom surface microhardness were recorded.
Statistical Analysis Used: Two-way analysis of variance, Tukey's test, and the t-test (α = 0.05) were used.
Results: Surface microhardness and DoC values were affected by light intensity and curing time (P < 0.05). In terms of microhardness and DoC, LED groups gave significantly more values than QTH groups (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: Curing time affected surface microhardness and DoC values of a nanohybrid resin composite in both conventional QTH and new LED light-curing units.

Keywords: Degree of conversion; light-curing unit; microhardness; resin composite

How to cite this article:
Tanthanuch S, Kukiattrakoon B. The effect of curing time by conventional quartz tungsten halogens and new light-emitting diodes light curing units on degree of conversion and microhardness of a nanohybrid resin composite. J Conserv Dent 2019;22:196-200

How to cite this URL:
Tanthanuch S, Kukiattrakoon B. The effect of curing time by conventional quartz tungsten halogens and new light-emitting diodes light curing units on degree of conversion and microhardness of a nanohybrid resin composite. J Conserv Dent [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Jul 17];22:196-200. Available from: http://www.jcd.org.in/text.asp?2019/22/2/196/257583

   Introduction Top


Demand for esthetics in dentistry has presently increased. One of the esthetic restorative materials used is light-cured resin composites which have been widely applied in clinical dentistry. This has also resulted in a rapid increase in the development of the number of light-curing units to polymerize light-activated resin composites.

Quartz–tungsten–halogen (QTH) light-curing units are the most commonly employed light-activation units in dentistry. Minimal intensity (400 mW/cm2) in the proper spectral distribution is necessary for complete polymerization of light-cured resin composite of 2 mm in depth.[1] The use of QTH curing units to polymerize resin composite has several drawbacks despite their popularity. The halogen bulbs have a limited effective lifetime of about 40–100 h. In addition, the reflector and filter degrade over time due to high operating temperatures and the large quantity of heat produced during the curing cycles.[1] To overcome the several drawbacks of QTH curing light units, blue light-emitting diodes (LEDs) have been developed for polymerization of light-activated resin composite. LED curing units feature very narrow spectral ranges of around 470 nm and a bandwidth of about 20 nm.[2] They have a lifetime of more than 10,000 h and undergo little degradation of light output overtime. They use junctions of doped semiconductors (p-n junctions) to generate light and require no filters to produce light. LED curing units are also resistant to shock and vibration. Their relatively low-power consumption makes them suitable for portable use. Previous studies have demonstrated good performance of LED light-curing units in terms of adequate depth of cure, flexural strength, and surface microhardness.[3],[4],[5]

The degree of conversion (DoC) is an important factor that affects clinical performance of resin composite restorations.[6],[7] It can be correlated with the composition of monomers and oligomers used in the material, which is the number of ethylene double carbon bonds converting into single bonds, and it provides the DoC (in percentage) for a resin composite. Several methods have been used to determine the DoC for a resin composite. Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) has been widely used as a reliable method for examining the DoC. It detects the C=C stretching vibrations directly before and after curing of materials.[8] FTIR spectra of both uncured and cured samples were analyzed using an accessory of the reflectance diffusion. However, to measure the DoC for bulk resin composite by FTIR, the procedure is time-consuming as the polymerized specimens need to be pulverized. Therefore, one of the most frequently used indirect methods for verifying the degree of resin composite polymerization is the microhardness test,[9] which indicates the strength under compressive loading.

The curing times, correct wavelength of the light source, and material compositions strongly influence the DoC.[7],[10] Previous studies have reported that high-intensity light provides higher values for the DoC[3],[11],[12] and demonstrated that LED curing units provide deeper depth of polymerization than QTH lamps.[3] However, little is known about the relationship between the minimal light-curing time required for proper polymerization on various QTH and LED light-curing units that have different light intensities. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the DoC and the hardness of resin composite polymerized by various QTH and LED curing units at different polymerized times. The null hypothesis was that there would be no effect of various light sources or intensities on the DoC and microhardness of a resin composite at different polymerized times used.


   Materials and Methods Top


Specimen preparations

One hundred and twenty cylindrical specimens of one brand of resin composite [Premise shade A2, Kerr Corp., Orange, USA: [Table 1] were prepared in polytetramethylfluoroethylene ring molds, 4.0 mm in internal diameter and 2 mm in thickness. To minimize the effects of colorants on the light penetration, the vita shade A2 of resin composite was selected.[13] The mold cavity was then filled with resin composite in a single increment on a glass plate and covered with a mylar matrix strip and a second glass plate was placed over the mylar strip. A static load of approximately 500 g was applied to this plate for 30 s to extrude excess resin composite and to obtain a flat surface that would facilitate hardness testing.
Table 1: Resin composite materials used in this study

Click here to view


Subsequently, the glass plate was removed from the top of the mold. The curing-light tip was then placed in contact with the top surface of the specimens. Three QTH light-curing units: Elipar 2500 (EL2500) (3M ESPE, Grafenau, Germany); Sprectrum 800 (SP) (Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany); and Demetron LC (DELC) (SDS Kerr, Danbury, CT, USA), and three LED light-curing units: Elipar S10 (ELS10) (3M ESPE, Grafenau, Germany); BlueShot (BS) (Shofu, Kyoto, Japan); and Demi (DELED) (SDS Kerr, Danbury, USA) were used in this present study. All LED light-curing units were used in the continuous mode. The intensity of all the curing light units was checked with a radiometer (Cure Rite model 8000, EFOS Inc., Mississauga, Canada) prior to use to ensure consistency in intensity output from the light source. The light-curing times used were 20 and 40 s for QTH and LED curing unit groups.

After polymerization, the mylar strip on the top and the glass plate on the bottom of the mold were removed. Subsequently, the specimen was removed from a ring mold. Ten specimens were assigned to each of the twelve groups as shown in [Table 1].

Surface hardness measurement

Five specimens (n = 5) of each group were tested using a Vickers hardness testing device (Micromet II, Buehler Ltd., Lake Bluff, USA). Hardness measurement was taken under a 100 g load for 10 s. Five hardness indentations, of 2 mm in thickness, were made on the top surface (near the light source) and five hardness indentations were made on the bottom surface (away from the light source) of each specimen. The mean of the five hardness measurements on each specimen was recorded as the hardness value of that surface of the specimen (top and bottom). The hardness ratio was also calculated by dividing hardness values of the top surface by hardness values of the bottom surface for each thickness and curing time. This value should be >0.8.[13]

Determination of the degree of conversion

Five specimens (n = 5) of each group were tested using an FTIR spectrometer (model EQUINO × 55, Bruker Optics Inc., Billerica, USA). Uncured paste of resin composite was smeared onto a potassium bromide disc, and the absorbance peaks before curing were obtained by the transmission mode of FTIR. The polymerized specimen was pulverized into fine powder with a hard tissue-grinding machine (model MA590, Marconi, Piracicaba, Brazil) immediately after curing. The absorbance peaks were then recorded using the diffuse-reflection mode of FTIR. The percentage of unreacted carbon-carbon double bonds (%C=C) was examined from the ratio of absorbance intensities of aliphatic C=C (peak at 1635 cm−1) against an internal standard before and after curing of the specimen and the aromatic C-C (peak at 1614 cm−1). The DoC was calculated by subtracting the C=C% from 100% according to the following formula:[8]



Statistical analysis

A two-way analysis of variance and Tukey's honestly significant difference test were applied to test the effect of the light-curing units (or intensities) and polymerized times on the DoC and hardness of the resin composite. One sample t-test was used to test these effects on the surface hardness on the top and bottom of the resin composite (α = 0.05).


   Results Top


The intensities of QTH and LED light-curing units, mean surface hardness, hardness ratio, and DoC are shown in [Table 2]. LED groups had more intensity than QTH groups. In terms of hardness ratio, no significant differences were found among QTH groups or among LED groups. LED groups have significantly more hardness ratio values than QTH groups (P < 0.05). In terms of DoC, LED groups also have significantly more DoC values than QTH groups (P < 0.05).
Table 2: Mean hardness, degree of conversion, and standard deviations of resin composite at different polymerized times, using quartz–tungsten–halogen and light-emitting diode light-curing units

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


The results of this present study support rejection of the null hypothesis because there would be an effect of various light sources or intensities on the DoC and hardness of resin composite at different polymerized times. The need for an adequate polymerization of the resin composite results in good physical and mechanical properties of the materials created for clinicians concerning the selection of the appropriate light-curing unit.

One of the most frequently used indirect methods for verifying the degree of resin composite polymerization is the microhardness test[9],[14],[15] that indicates the strength under compressive loading. In the present study, the results presented that the polymerized time used affected hardness values and DoC values. In fact, as light passed through the bulk of a resin composite, its intensity is greatly decreased due to the absorption and scattering of light by filler particles and the resin matrix. This decreasing results in a gradation of cure such that it decreases from the top surface inward. This then accounted for the difference between top surface hardness and bottom surface hardness of all specimens cured with each light source[16] which was different to results when using the FTIR technique. To measure the DoC of bulk resin composite by FTIR, polymerized specimens need to be pulverized into fine powder. So accounting the DoC of specimens were the average value of bulk resin composite, which found a significant difference among the evaluated groups in this present study. At the equal time used, new LED curing units provide deeper depth of polymerization than conventional QTH. However, there was no statistical difference in irradiation time between conventional QTH irradiation time at 40 s and new LED light-curing units at 20 s. This result is caused from new LED curing units performed high intensity of light more than conventional QTH, associated with some recent studies which found that high-intensity light provides higher values for the DoC.[3],[11],[12]

For all light-curing units in the present study, microhardness values were high at the top surface, which can be attributed to the relationship between irradiation distance and effectiveness of polymerization. In particular, the hardness values of the bottom surface should be close to the hardness values of the top surface, resulting in a hardness ratio >0.8.[13] In the present study, effective hardness ratios were achieved with most light-curing unit groups, which is in agreement with previous studies.[3],[11],[12],[17],[18] A plausible reason for this outcome could be related to the light intensities and duration of the curing time used. A greater intensity of light energy and lengthy duration are sufficient to excite the camphorquinone in the resin composite material. As shown in the present study, increasing the duration of irradiation time provided significantly more polymerization than a short irradiation time for the same thickness, agreeing with the results of previous studies.[19],[20],[21] These results might be applied in a clinical situation.

It must be noted that there are some limitations in the present study. The specimen surfaces were flat, whereas, clinically, resin composite restorations have irregular shapes with convex and concave surfaces. Specimens used for extraoral evaluations are usually monochromatic, uniformly translucent, and untextured while intraoral restorations contrast with all of the above. These limitations may considerably affect these results. More in vivo studies are needed to assess the effects of different light intensities of light-curing units, time and thickness on microhardness, and degrees of conversion.


   Conclusion Top


Within the limitations of this study, the following conclusions could be drawn: curing time affected surface microhardness and DoC values of a nanohybrid resin composite in both of conventional QTHs and new LEDs light-curing units.

Financial support and sponsorship

The study was funded by the Faculty of Dentistry research fund, Prince of Songkla University.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
   References Top

1.
Soh MS, Yap AU, Siow KS. Effectiveness of composite cure associated with different curing modes of LED lights. Oper Dent 2003;28:371-7.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Hofmann N, Hugo B, Klaiber B. Effect of irradiation type (LED or QTH) on photo-activated composite shrinkage strain kinetics, temperature rise, and hardness. Eur J Oral Sci 2002;110:471-9.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Jandt KD, Mills RW, Blackwell GB, Ashworth SH. Depth of cure and compressive strength of dental composites cured with blue light emitting diodes (LEDs). Dent Mater 2000;16:41-7.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Mills RW, Jandt KD, Ashworth SH. Dental composite depth of cure with halogen and blue light emitting diode technology. Br Dent J 1999;186:388-91.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Tanthanuch S, Ruengsri P, Kukiattrakoon B. Optimal depth of cure for nanohybrid resin composite using quartz tungsten halogen and new high intensity light-emitting diode curing units. Gen Dent 2013;61:e14-7.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Imazato S, Tarumi H, Kobayashi K, Hiraguri H, Oda K, Tsuchitani Y. Relationship between the degree of conversion and internal discoloration of light-activated composite. Dent Mater J 1995;14:23-30.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Atria PJ, Sampaio CS, Cáceres E, Fernández J, Reis AF, Giannini M, et al. Micro-computed tomography evaluation of volumetric polymerization shrinkage and degree of conversion of composites cured by various light power outputs. Dent Mater J 2018;37:33-9.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Imazato S, McCabe JF, Tarumi H, Ehara A, Ebisu S. Degree of conversion of composites measured by DTA and FTIR. Dent Mater 2001;17:178-83.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Knobloch L, Kerby RE, Clelland N, Lee J. Hardness and degree of conversion of posterior packable composites. Oper Dent 2004;29:642-9.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Mousavinasab SM, Khoroushi M, Moharreri M, Atai M. Temperature changes under demineralized dentin during polymerization of three resin-based restorative materials using QTH and LED units. Restor Dent Endod 2014;39:155-63.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Sakaguchi RL, Berge HX. Reduced light energy density decreases post-gel contraction while maintaining degree of conversion in composites. J Dent 1998;26:695-700.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Nomura Y, Teshima W, Tanaka N, Yoshida Y, Nahara Y, Okazaki M. Thermal analysis of dental resins cured with blue light-emitting diodes (LEDs). J Biomed Mater Res 2002;63:209-13.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Bayne SC, Heymann HO, Swift EJ Jr. Update on dental composite restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;125:687-701.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
DeWald JP, Ferracane JL. A comparison of four modes of evaluating depth of cure of light-activated composites. J Dent Res 1987;66:727-30.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Galvão MR, Caldas SG, Bagnato VS, de Souza Rastelli AN, de Andrade MF. Evaluation of degree of conversion and hardness of dental composites photo-activated with different light guide tips. Eur J Dent 2013;7:86-93.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Hubbezoǧlu I, Bolayir G, Doǧan OM, Doǧan A, Ozer A, Bek B. Microhardness evaluation of resin composites polymerized by three different light sources. Dent Mater J 2007;26:845-53.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Rode KM, Kawano Y, Turbino ML. Evaluation of curing light distance on resin composite microhardness and polymerization. Oper Dent 2007;32:571-8.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Bani M, Tirali RE. Effect of new light curing units on microleakage and microhardness of resin sealants. Dent Mater J 2016;35:517-22.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Hyun HK, Christoferson CK, Pfeifer CS, Felix C, Ferracane JL. Effect of shade, opacity and layer thickness on light transmission through a nano-hybrid dental composite during curing. J Esthet Restor Dent 2017;29:362-7.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Esmaeili B, Safarcherati H, Vaezi A. Hardness evaluation of composite resins cured with QTH and LED. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2014;8:40-4.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Erickson RL, Barkmeier WW, Halvorson RH. Curing characteristics of a composite – Part 1: Cure depth relationship to conversion, hardness and radiant exposure. Dent Mater 2014;30:e125-33.  Back to cited text no. 21
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Prof. Boonlert Kukiattrakoon
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Dental Materials Research Unit (Second Phase), Faculty of Dentistry, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Songkhla
Thailand
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_498_18

Rights and Permissions



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
 
 
 
  Search
 
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  
 


    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed120    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded55    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal