Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effect of light curing unit on resin-modified glass-ionomer cements: a microhardness assessment
Cefaly, Daniela Francisca Gigo; Mello, Liliam Lucia Carrara Paes de; Wang, Linda; Lauris, José Roberto Pereira; D'Alpino, Paulo Henrique Perlatti.
Afiliação
  • Cefaly, Daniela Francisca Gigo; University North of Paraná. Department of Operative Dentistry. Londrina. BR
  • Mello, Liliam Lucia Carrara Paes de; North of Paraná Deontological Association. Department of Operative Dentistry. Londrina. BR
  • Wang, Linda; University of São Paulo. Bauru School of Dentistry. Department of Operative Dentistry, Endodontics and Dental Materials. Bauru. BR
  • Lauris, José Roberto Pereira; University of São Paulo. Bauru School of Dentistry. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Community Health. Bauru. BR
  • D'Alpino, Paulo Henrique Perlatti; University Bandeirante of São Paulo. Department of Operative Dentistry. São Paulo. BR
J. appl. oral sci ; 17(3): 150-154, May-June 2009. tab
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS | ID: lil-514024
Biblioteca responsável: BR1.1
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.
Assuntos

Texto completo: Disponível Coleções: Bases de dados internacionais Base de dados: LILACS Assunto principal: Luzes de Cura Dentária / Cimentos de Ionômeros de Vidro Tipo de estudo: Estudo de avaliação Idioma: Inglês Revista: J. appl. oral sci Assunto da revista: Odontologia Ano de publicação: 2009 Tipo de documento: Artigo País de afiliação: Brasil Instituição/País de afiliação: North of Paraná Deontological Association/BR / University Bandeirante of São Paulo/BR / University North of Paraná/BR / University of São Paulo/BR
Texto completo: Disponível Coleções: Bases de dados internacionais Base de dados: LILACS Assunto principal: Luzes de Cura Dentária / Cimentos de Ionômeros de Vidro Tipo de estudo: Estudo de avaliação Idioma: Inglês Revista: J. appl. oral sci Assunto da revista: Odontologia Ano de publicação: 2009 Tipo de documento: Artigo País de afiliação: Brasil Instituição/País de afiliação: North of Paraná Deontological Association/BR / University Bandeirante of São Paulo/BR / University North of Paraná/BR / University of São Paulo/BR
...