The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between the amount of cuspal deflection and linear polymerization shrinkage in resin composite and polyacid modified resin composite. For cuspal defelction and shrinkage measurement, Dyract AP, Compoglass F, Z100, Surefil, Pyramid, Synergy Compact, Heliomolar and Heliomolar HB were used.

For measuring polymerization shrinkage, a custom made linometer (R&B, Daejon, Korea) was used. The amount of shrinkage among materials was compared using One-way ANOVA analysis and Tukey's test at the 95% of confidence level.

For measuring cuspal deflection of teeth, standardized MOD cavities were prepared in extracted maxillary premolars. After a self-etching adhesive was applied, cavities were bulk filled with one of the filling materials.Fifteen teeth were used for each material. Cuspal deflection was measured by a custom made cuspal-deflection measuring device. One-way ANOVA analysis and Tukey's test were used to determine differences between the materials at the 95% of confidence level.

Correlation of polymerization shrinkage and cuspal deflection were analyzed by regression analysis.

The amount of polymerization shrinkage from least to greatest was Heliomolar, Surefil < Heliomolar HB < Z100, Synergy Compact < Dyract AP < Pyramid, Compoglass F (p < 0.05).

The amount of cuspal deflection from least to greatest was Z100, Heliomolar, Heliomolar HB, Synergy Compact Surefil < Compoglass F < Pyramid, Dyract AP (p < 0.05).

The amount of polymerization shrinkage and cuspal deflection showed a correlation (p < 0.001).

Periapical cemental dysplasia(PCD) is a condition most commonly seen in the mandibular incisor region. Radiographically it passes through the three phases(osteolytic stage, intermediate stage, and mature stage). At osteolytic stage, the lesion is similar to features associated with granuloma or cyst that arise following pulpal necrosis. So, it is important to confirm the vitality of the pulp to diagnosis.

In this case, it is difficult to confirm the vitality of involved tooth because the tooth was covered with PFG bridge. And it is unusual that the PCD lesion at mandibular incisors has occurred at first and the lesion of mandibular canine and mandibular premolar were occurred afterward.

The purpose of present study was to evaluate the polymerization shrinkage stress and cuspal deflection in maxillary premolars resulting from polymerization shrinkage of composites and compomers.

Composites and compomers which were used in this study were as follows: Dyract AP, Z100, Surefil, Pyramid, Synergy Compact, Heliomolar, Heliomolar HB, and Compoglass F. For measuring of polymerization shrinkage stress, Stress measuring machine (R&B, Daejon, Korea) was used. One-way ANOVA analysis with Duncan's multiple comparison test were used to determine significant differences between the materials.

For measuring of cuspal deflection of tooth, MOD cavities were prepared in 10 extracted maxillary premolars. And reduction of intercuspal distance was measured by strain measuring machine (R&B, Daejon, Korea) One-way ANOVA analysis with Turkey test were used to determine significant differences between the materials.

Polymerization shrinkage stress is 『Heliomolar, Z100, Pyramid < Synergy Compact Compoglass F < Dyract AP < Heliomolr HB, surefil』 (P < 0.05). And cuspal delfelction is 『Z100, Heliomolar, Heliomolar HB, Synergy Compact Surefil, < Compoglass F < Pyramid, Dyract AP』 (P < 0.05).

Measurements of ploymerization shrinkage stress and those of cuspal deflection of the teeth was different. There is no correlation between polymerization shrinkage stress and cuspal deflection of the teeth (p > 0.05).

The purpose of present study was to evaluate the polymerization shrinkage stress and amount of linear shrinkage of composites and compomers for posterior restoration.

For this purpose, linear polymerization shrinkage and polymerization stress were measured.

For linear polymerization shrinklage and polymerization stress measurement, custom made Linometer (R&B, Daejon, Korea) and Stress measuring machine was used (R&B, Daejon, Korea). Compositers and compomers were evaluated; Dyract AP (Dentsply Detrey, Gumbh. German) Z100 (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, USA) Surefil (Dentsply Caulk, Milford, USA) Pyramid(Bisco, Schaumburg, USA) Synergy Compact (Coltene, Altstatten, Switzerland), Heliomolar (Vivadent/Ivoclar, Liechtenstein), and Compoglass (Vivadent Ivoclar/Liechtenstein) were used. 15 measurements were made for each material. Linear polymerization shrinkage or polymerization stress for each material was compared with one way ANOVA with Tukey at 95% levels of confidence.

For linear shrinkage; Heliomolar, Surefil<Synergy Compact, Z100<Dyract AP<Pyramid, Compoglass F (p<0.05)

For Shrinkage stress; Heliomolar<Z100, Pyramid<Synergy Compact, Compoglass F<Dyract AP<Heliomolar HB, Surefil (p<0.05)

This study evaluated the effectiveness of the light emitting diode(LED) units for composite curing. To compare its effectiveness with conventional quartz tungsten halogen (QTH) light curing unit, the microhardness of 2mm composite, Z250, which had been light cured by the LEDs (Ultralume LED2, FreeLight, Developing product D1) or QTH (XL 3000) were compared on the upper and lower surface. One way ANOVA with Tukey and Paired t-test was used at 95% levels of confidence. In addition, the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was compared between composites which were light cured by QTH or LEDs using a custom-made linometer in 10s and 60s of light curing, and the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was compared by one way ANOVA with Tukey.

The amount of polymerization shrinkage at 10s was

XL3000 > Ultralume 2, 40, 60> FreeLight, D1 (P<0.05)

The amount of polymerization shrinkage at 60s was

XL3000 > Ultralume 2, 60> Ultralume 2,40> FreeLight, D1 (P<0.05)

The microhardness on the upper and lower surface was as follows;

It was concluded that the LEDs produced lower polymerization shrinkage in 10s and 60s compared with QTH unit. In addition, the microhardness of samples which had been cured with LEDs was lower on the lower surfaces than the upper surfaces whereas there was no difference in QTH cured samples.