Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2008; 02(04): 240-246
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1697387
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Effects of Different Light Curing Units/Modes on the Microleakage of Flowable Composite Resins

A. Ruya Yazici
a   Associate Professor, Hacettepe University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey
,
Cigdem Celik
b   Instructor, Baskent University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey
,
Berrin Dayangac
c   Professor, Hacettepe University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey
,
Gul Ozgunaltay
c   Professor, Hacettepe University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
27 September 2019 (online)

  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Objectives: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of different light curing units and modes on microleakage of flowable composite resins.

Methods: Eighty Class V cavities were prepared in buccal and lingual surfaces of 40 extracted human premolars with cervical wall located in dentin and the occlusal wall in enamel. These teeth were randomly assigned into two groups (n=20) and restored with different flowable composites; Group I: Esthet-X Flow, Group II: Grandio Flow. Each group was randomly divided into four subgroups; while the samples of the first subgroup were polymerized with conventional Halogen light, the rest of them were polymerized with different curing modes of Light Emitting Diode (LED). The second subgroup was polymerized with fast-curing; the third subgroup with pulse-curing and those of the fourth subgroup with step-curing modes of LED. After the samples were thermocycled and immersed in dye, they were longitudinally sectioned. Dye penetration was assessed under a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests.

Results: None of the restorations showed leakage on enamel margins. On dentin margins no significant differences were observed between flowable composite resins polymerized with halogen light (P>.05). While step curing mode of LED presented significant differences between the resins, the difference was insignificant when fast-curing and pulse-curing mode of LED were used. No statistically significant differences were observed between curing units for Esthet-X Flow samples. For Grandio Flow samples, only step-curing mode of LED caused statistically higher leakage scores than halogen and other curing modes of LED (P<.05).

Conclusions: The effect of curing units� type and curing mode on flowable composite resin leakage might be material-dependent. (Eur J Dent 2008;2:240-246)

Key Words:

Microleakage - Flowable composite resins - Light curing units
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Labella R, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B, Vanherle G. Polymerization shrinkage and elasticity of flowable composites and filled adhesives. Dent Mater 1999; 15: 128-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift Jr EJ, Stamatiades P, Wilkerson M. A characterization of first-generation flowable composites. J Am Dent Assoc 1998; 129: 567-577
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Moncada G, Fernandez E, Martin J, Arancibia C, Mjör IA, Gordan VV. Increasing the longevity of restorations by minimal intervention? A two-year clinical trial. Oper Dent 2008; 33: 258-264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Chan DC, Browning WD, Fraizer KB, Brackett MG. Clinical evaluation of the soft-start (pulse-delay) polymerization technique in Class I and II composite restorations. Oper Dent 2008; 33: 265-271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Obici AC, Sinhoreti MA, de Goes MF, Consani S, Sobrinho LC. Effect of photo-activation method on polymerization shrinkage of restorative composites. Oper Dent 2002; 27: 192-198
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Carvalho RM, Pereira JC, Yoshiyama M, Pashley DH. A review of polymerization contraction: the influence of stress development versus stress relief. Oper Dent 1996; 21: 17-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bergenholtz G, Cox CF, Loesche WJ, Syed SA. Bacterial leakage around dental restorations: its effect on the dental pulp. J Oral Pathol 1982; 11: 439-450
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Triadan H. When is microleakage a real clinical problem?. Oper Dent 1987; 12: 153-157
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Munksgaard EC, Hansen EK, Kato H. Wall to wall polymerization contraction of composite resin versus filler content. Scand J Dent Res 1987; 95: 526-531
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Iga M, Takeshige F, Ui T, Torii M. The relationship between polymerization shrinkage measured by a modified dilatometer and the inorganic filler content in light cured composites. Dent Mater J 1991; 10: 38-40
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Unterbrink GL, Muessener R. Influence of light intensity on two restorative systems. J Dent 1995; 23: 183-189
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dennison JB, Yaman P, Seir R, Hamilton JC. Effect of variable light intensity on composite shrinkage. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 84: 499-505
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Sakaguchi RL, Douglas WH, Peters MC. Curing light performance and polymerization of composite restorative materials. J Dent 1992; 20: 183-188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Amaral CM, de Castro AK, Pimenta LA, Ambrosano GM. Influence of resin composite polymerization techniques on microleakage and microhardness. Quintessence Int 2002; 33: 685-689
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Cavalcante LMA, Peris AR, Amaral CM, Ambrosano GMB, Pimenta LAF. Influence of polymerization technique on microleakage and microhardness of resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2003; 28: 200-206
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Davidson CL, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymer-based restoratives. J Dent 1997; 25: 435-440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Two-step curing on conversion and softening of a dental polymer. Dent Mater 2003; 19: 466-470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Feilzer 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; 103: 322-326
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Rueggeberg F. Contemporary issues in photocuring. Compend Contin Edu Dent 1999; 20 suppl (Suppl. 25) S4-S15
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Davidson CL, de Gee AJ. Light-curing units, polymerization, and clinical implications. J Adhes Dent 2000; 2: 167-173
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Soh MS, Yap AU. Influence of curing modes on crosslink density in polymer structures. J Dent 2004; 32: 321-326
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Nomoto R, McCabe JF, Hirano S. Comparison of halogen, plasma and LED curing units. Oper Dent 2004; 29: 287-294
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Dunn WJ, Bush AC. A comparison of polymerization by light-emitting diode and halogen- based light-curing units. J Am Dent Assoc 2002; 133: 335-341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ozturk B, Ozturk AN, Usumez A, Usumez S, Ozer F. Temperature rise during adhesive and resin composite polymerization with various light curing sources. Oper Dent 2004; 29: 325-332
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Yazici AR, Müftü A, Kugel G, Perry RD. Comparison of temperature changes in the pulp chamber induced by various light curing units, in vitro. Oper Dent 2006; 31: 261-265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Mills RW, Jandt KD, Ashworth SH. Dental composite depth of cure with halogen and blue light emitting diode technology. Br Dent J 1999; 186: 388-391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Yap AU, Soh MS. Thermal emission by different light-curing units. Oper Dent 2003; 28: 260-266
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Temperature rise induced by some light emitting diyote and quartz-tungsten-halogen curing units. Eur J Oral Sci 2005; 113: 96-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Owens BM. Evaluation of curing performance of light- emitting polymerization units. Gen Dent 2006; 54: 17-20
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Mehl A, Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH. Physical properties and gap formation of light-cured composites with and without soft-start polymerization. J Dent 1997; 25: 321-330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Uno S, Asmussen E. Marginal adaptation of a restorative resin polymerized at reduced rate. Scand J Dent Res 1991; 99: 440-444
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Oberholzer TG, Du Preez IC, Kidd M. Effect of LED curing on the microleakage, shear bond strength and surface hardness of a resin-based composite restoration. Biomater 2005; 26: 3981-3986
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Santos AJ, Lisso MT, Aguiar FH, Franca FM, Lovadino JR. Effect of stepped exposure of quantitative in vitro marginal microleakage. J Esthet Restor Dent 2005; 17: 236-242
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Friedl KH, Schmalz G, Hiller KA, Markl A. Marginal adaptation of Class V restorations with and without “softstart polymerization”. Oper Dent 2000; 25: 26-32
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Yap AU, Soh MS, Siow KS. Post-gel shrinkage with pulse activation and soft-start polymerization. Oper Dent 2002; 27: 81-87
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Muangmingsuk A, Senawongse P, Yudhasaraprasithi S. Influence of different soft start polymerization techniques on marginal adaptation of Class V restorations. Am J Dent 2003; 16: 117-119
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Nalcaci A, Ulusoy N, Küçükeçmen C. Effect of LED curing modes on the microleakage of a pit and fissure sealant. Am J Dent 2007; 20: 255-258
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Fleming GJ, Cara RR, Palin WM, Burke FJ. Cuspal movement and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with resin-based filling materials cured using ‘soft-start’ polymerization protocol. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 637-643
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Pearson GJ. Aspects of the use and abuse of aesthetic restoratives: 1. Composite materials. Dent Update 1990; 17: 103-108
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Jain P, Pershing A. Depth of cure with high-intensity and ramped resin-based composite curing lights. J Am Dent Assoc 2003; 134: 1215-1223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Ernst CP, Brand N, Frommator U, Rippin G, Willershausen B. Reduction of polymerization shrinkage stress and marginal microleakage using soft-start polymerization. J Esthet Restor Dent 2003; 15: 93-103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Pradelle-Plasse N, Besnault C, Souad N, Colon P. Influence of new light curing units and bonding agents on the microleakage of Class V composite resin restorations. Am J Dent 2003; 16: 409-413
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Kanca III J, Suh BI. Pulse activation: reducing resin-based composite contraction stresses at the enamel cavosurface margins. Am J Dent 1999; 12: 107-112
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Luo Y, Lo EC, Wei SH, Tay FR. Comparison of pulse activation vs conventional light-curing on marginal adaptation of a compomer conditioned using a total-etch or a self-etch technique. Dent Mater 2002; 18: 36-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Uno S, Tanaka T, Natsuizaka A, Abo T. Effect of slow curing on cavity wall adaptation using a new intensity changeable light source. Dent Mater 2003; 19: 147-152
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, Hayashi Y. The effect of light-curing modes on the microleakage of cervical resin composite restorations. J Dent 2004; 32: 247-254
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Svizero NR, D’Alpino PH, da Silva e Souza de Carvalho RM. Liner and light exposure: Effect on in-vitro class V microleakage. Oper Dent 2005; 30: 325-330
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Christensen RP, Palmer TM, Ploeger BJ, Yost MP. Resin polymerization problems-are they caused by resin curing lights, resin formulation or both. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1999; 25 suppl S42-54
    Google Scholar