ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the microhardness of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (RMGICs) photoactivated with a blue light-emitting diode (LED) curing light. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty specimens were distributed in 3 groups: Fuji II LC Improved/GC (RM1), Vitremer/3M ESPE (RM2) and Filtek Z250/ 3M ESPE (RM3). Two commercial light-curing units were used to polymerize the materials: LED/Ultrablue IS and a halogen light/XL3000 (QTH). After 24 h, Knoop microhardness test was performed. Data were submitted to three-way ANOVA and Tukey's test at a pre-set alpha of 0.05. RESULTS: At the top surface, no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) in the microhardness was seen when the LED and QTH lights were used for all materials. At the bottom surface, microhardness mean value of RM2 was significantly higher when the QTH light was used (p<0.05). For RM1, statistically significant higher values (p<0.05) were seen when the LED light was used. No statistically significant difference (p>0.05) was seen at the bottom surface for RM3, irrespective of the light used. Top-to-bottom surface comparison showed no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) for both RMGICs, regardless of the light used. For RM3, microhardness mean value at the top was significantly higher (p<0.05) than bottom microhardness when both curing units were used. CONCLUSION: The microhardness values seen when a LED light was used varied depending on the restorative material tested.
Subject(s)
Curing Lights, Dental , Glass Ionomer Cements/radiation effects , Composite Resins/radiation effects , Glass Ionomer Cements/chemistry , Halogens , Hardness , Light-Curing of Dental Adhesives , Materials Testing , Resins, Synthetic/radiation effects , Semiconductors , Surface PropertiesABSTRACT
The Light Emitting Diodes (LED) technology has been used to photoactivate composite resins and there is a great number of published studies in this area. However, there are no studies regarding resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (RMGIC), which also need photoactivation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate water sorption of two RMGIC photoactivated with LED and to compare this property to that obtained with a halogen light curing unit. A resin composite was used as control. Five specimens of 15.0 mm in diameter x 1.0 mm in height were prepared for each combination of material (Fuji II LC Improved, Vitremer, and Filtek Z250) and curing unit (Radii and Optilight Plus) and transferred to desiccators until a constant mass was obtained. Then the specimens were immersed into deionized water for 7 days, weighed and reconditioned to a constant mass in desiccators. Water sorption was calculated based on weight and volume of specimens. The data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey test (p < 0.05). Specimens photocured with LED presented significantly more water sorption than those photocured with halogen light. The RMGIC absorbed statistically significant more water than the resin composite. The type of light curing unit affected water sorption characteristics of the RMGIC.
A tecnologia baseada em Diodos emissores de luz (LED) tem sido utilizada para a fotoativação de resinas compostas e existe um grande número de estudos publicados a este respeito. Entretanto, não existem estudos envolvendo cimentos de ionômero de vidro modificados por resina (CIVMR), que também necessitam fotoativação. Assim, o objetivo deste estudo foi o de avaliar a sorção de água de dois CIVMR fotoativados com LED e comparar essa propriedade com aquela obtida com unidade com lâmpada halógena. Uma resina composta foi utilizada como controle. Cinco espécimes com 15,0 mm diâmetro x 1,0 mm de altura foram preparados para cada combinação de material (Fuji II LC Improved, Vitremer e Filtek Z250) e fonte de luz (Radii e Optilight Plus) e transferidos a dessecadores até a obtenção de massa constante. Em seguida, os espécimes foram imersos em água deionizada por 7 dias, pesados e recondicionados a uma massa constante em dessecadores. A sorção de água foi calculada com base no peso e no volume dos espécimes. Os dados foram analisados por ANOVA a dois critérios e teste de Tukey (p < 0,05). Os espécimes fotoativados com LED apresentaram maior sorção de água que os fotoativados com lâmpada halógena. Os CIVMR absorveram mais água que a resina composta. O tipo de unidade de fotoativação afetou as características de sorção de água dos CIVMR.
Subject(s)
Composite Resins/chemistry , Glass Ionomer Cements/chemistry , Light , Water , Absorption , Analysis of Variance , Composite Resins/radiation effects , Glass Ionomer Cements/radiation effects , Halogens , Materials Testing , SpectrophotometryABSTRACT
O estilo de vida moderno induziu a mudanças de hábitos alimentares que geraram novas consequências e riscos à saúde bucal, levando a uma crescente evidência de lesões não cariosas. O conhecimento da etiologia destas lesões e o avanço no desenvolvimento dos materiais e técnicas restauradoras permitem um tratamento rápido e eficiente no restabelecimento da estética e função. A correta orientação e cuidados do paciente podem prolongar a vida útil destas restaurações.