ABSTRACT
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of artificial accelerated aging on the color stability and opacity of composites of different shades. METHODS: Four composites for direct use (Heliomolar, 4 Seasons, Tetric EvoCeram; QuiXfil) and one for indirect use (SR Adoro) in two shades were used: light (A2) and dark (C3 for direct, and D4 for indirect composite). QuiXfil was obtained in Universal shade. A Teflon matrix (12 X 2 mm) was used to obtain 54 specimens (N=6), which were submitted to color and opacity analysis (Spectrophotometer PCB 6807, Byk Gardner) before and after artificial accelerated aging for 384 hours. RESULTS: After the statistical analysis (2-way ANOVA - Bonferroni - P<0.05), significant color alteration was observed in the light and dark composites studied (P<0.05), with the exception of QuiXfil. Composite 4 Seasons/C3 showed less color alteration (ΔE=0.91). The opacity alteration (ΔOP) was higher for light composites. CONCLUSION: Artificial accelerated aging interfered in the optical properties assessed; however, the alterations seemed to be more related to the composites composition than to their shade.
Subject(s)
Composite Resins , Color , Materials Testing , Time FactorsABSTRACT
AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the polymerization contraction stress of composites photoactivated by two light sources: quartz tungsten halogen light (QTH) and light emitting diode (LED). METHODS: Glass rods were fabricated (5.0 mm X 5.0 cm) and one of the surfaces was air abraded with aluminum oxide. An adhesive was applied to this surface and photoactivated by LED. The glass rods were assembled to a Universal Testing machine (Instron - 5565) and the composite were applied to the lower rod using a manual instrument. The upper rod was placed closer, at 2 mm, and an extensometer was attached to the rods. The twenty composites were polymerized by either by QTH (N.=10) or LED (N.=10). Polymerization was carried out using two apparatuses positioned in opposite sides, which were simultaneously activated for 30 seconds. Contraction stress was analyzed twice: shortly after polymerization (t30s) and 30 minutes later (t30min). RESULTS: The contraction stress for all composites was higher at t30min than at t30s, regardless of the activation source. Z100 showed lower contraction stress values (P<0.05) compared to the other composites. Regarding to Charisma and TPH, the photoactivation source had no influence on contraction stress, except for Z100 at t30min. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that composite composition is the factor that most influence the polymerization contraction stress.
