OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at evaluating the degree of conversion (DC) of four composite resins, being one nanofilled and 3 microhybrid resins, photo-activated with second- and third-generation light-emitting diodes (LEDs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Filtek™ Z350 nanofilled composite resins and Amelogen® Plus, Vit-l-escence™ and Opallis microhybrid resins were photo-activated with two second-generation LEDs (Radii-cal and Elipar Free Light™ 2) and one third-generation LED (Ultra-Lume LED 5) by continuous light mode, and a quartz halogen-tungsten bulb (QHT, control). After 24 h of storage, the samples were pulverized into fine powder and 5 mg of each material were mixed with 100 mg of potassium bromide (KBr). After homogenization, they were pressed, which resulted in a pellet that was evaluated using an infrared spectromer (Nexus 470, Thermo Nicolet) equipped with TGS detector using diffuse reflectance (32 scans, resolution of 4 cm(-1)) coupled to a computer. The percentage of unreacted carbon-carbon double bonds (% C=C) was determined from the ratio of absorbance intensities of aliphatic C=C (peak at 1637 cm-1) against internal standard before and after curing of the specimen: aromatic C-C (peak at 1610 cm-1). RESULTS: The ANOVA showed a significant effect on the interaction between the light-curing units (LCUs) and the composite resins (p<0.001). The Tukeys test showed that the nanofilled resin (Filtek™ Z350) and Opallis when photo-activated by the halogen lamp (QTH) had the lowest DC compared with the other microhybrid composite resins. The DC of the nanofilled resin (Filtek™ Z350) was also lower using LEDs. The highest degrees of conversion were obtained using the third-generation LED and one of second-generation LEDs (Elipar Free Light™ 2). CONCLUSIONS: The nanofilled resin showed the lowest DC, and the Vit-l-escence™ microhybrid composite resin showed the highest DC. Among the LCUs, it was not possible to establish an order, even though the second-generation LED Radii-cal provided the lowest DC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ribeiro et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: