MICROHARDNESS AND MICROLEAKAGE OF COMPOSITE RESIN CURED BY VISIBLE LIGHT WITH VARIOUS BAND OF WAVELENGTH

Soo-Man Park; Jae-Yong Lee; Seung-Ryul Han; Sang-Yoon Ha; Dong-Hoon Shin

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.4.403

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 27(4); 2002 > Article

Original Article MICROHARDNESS AND MICROLEAKAGE OF COMPOSITE RESIN CURED BY VISIBLE LIGHT WITH VARIOUS BAND OF WAVELENGTH: Soo-Man Park, Jae-Yong Lee, Seung-Ryul Han, Sang-Yoon Ha, Dong-Hoon Shin; Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2002;27(4):403-410.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.4.403
Published online: January 14, 2002

Dept. of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Dankook University

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

19 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

Several ways of curing are being tried to improve material’s properties and reduce marginal gap. However, all are considering about the pattern of light intensity. It was noted from the preliminary study the change of light wavelength from filter changing may give an impact on material’s property and microleakage.

The object of this study was to verify the effect of filters with various wavelength width on the microhardness and microleakage of composite resin; hybrid type of DenFil and submicron hybrid type of Esthet X. Composite resins were cured using 3 kinds of filter; narrow-banded(465-475 nm), mid-banded(430-470 nm), wide-banded(400-500 nm). After the estimation of microhardness, degree of dye penetration and the maximum gap from SEM evaluation were done between 4 groups that showed no difference in microhardness value of the lower surface.
The results were as follows:
1. Adequate microhardness could not be gained with a narrow-banded filter irrespective of curing time. At the upper surface, DenFil should be polymerized with middle or wide-banded filter for 20 seconds at least, while Esthet X be cured with middle or wide-banded filter for 30 seconds at least to get similar hardness value to control group.
2. There was little dye penetration in enamel margin, but all dentin margins showed much more dye penetration irrespective of curing conditions. Although there was no statistical difference, groups cured with mid-banded filter for 40 seconds and with wide-width filter for 20 seconds showed relatively less dye penetration.
3. It was revealed from the SEM examination that group cured with wide-banded filter had the smallest gap without statistical significance. Spearman’s rho test showed that the correlation between the results of dye penetration and SEM examination was very low.
From these results, it could be concluded that curing with wide-width filter would be better than the other techniques, even though the curing technique using mid-width filter seems to have its own unique advantage.
Keywords: Microhardness; Microleakage; Wavelength width; Filter; Curing

Table 1.

Microhardness values of groups (kg/mm²)

Wavelength	Curing time (sec.)	Upper surface		Lower surface
Wavelength	Curing time (sec.)	DenFil	Esthet X	DenFil	Esthet X
Narrow	20	78.95 (2.09)	54.77 (2.81)	40.06 (3.39)	26.95 (4.96)
	30	86.87 (1.22)	58.25 (5.01)	58.26 (2.49)	39.24 (4.20)
	40	89.02 (4.36)	66.98 (5.73)	66.65 (4.54)	51.43 (5.38)
Middle	20	100.13 (4.78)	66.08 (5.64)	66.47 (3.53)	44.60 (3.17)
	30	96.73 (7.48)	81.28 (5.44)	84.95 (7.71)	67.91 (5.63)
	40	99.39 (5.68)	73.95 (2.03)	79.28 (4.87)	61.17 (2.70)
Wide	20	95.81 (7.18)	78.28 (3.82)	86.49 (7.14)	64.79 (5.76)
	30	104.40 (4.58)	83.55 (8.42)	95.39 (3.86)	73.88 (7.16)
	40	99.90 (6.83)	83.19 (9.71)	94.60 (4.72)	65.82 (9.48)

Table 2.

Statistical difference of the upper surface of DenFil

Wavelength (time)	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
Wavelength (time)	N	1	2	3	4
Narrow (20)	10	78.95
Narrow (30)	10	86.87	86.87
Narrow (40)	10		89.02	89.02
Wide (20)	10		95.81	95.81	95.81
Middle (40)	10			96.73	96.73
Middle (30)	10				99.39
Wide (30)	10				99.90
Middle (20)	10				100.13
Wide (40)	10				104.40
Significance		0.216	0.097	0.251	0.129

Table 3.

Statistical difference of the upper surface of Esthet X

Wavelength (time)	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
Wavelength (time)	N	1	2	3	4
Narrow (20)	10	54.77
Narrow (30)	10	58.25	58.25
Middle (20)	10		66.08	66.08
Narrow (40)	10		66.98	66.98
Middle (30)	10			73.95	73.95
Wide (20)	10				78.28
Middle (40)	10				81.28
Wide (30)	10				83.19
Wide (40)	10				83.55
Significance		0.987	0.219	0.360	0.119

Table 4.

Statistical difference of the lower surface of DenFil

Wavelength (time)	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
Wavelength (time)	N	1	2	3	4
Narrow (20)	10	40.06
Narrow (30)	10		58.26
Middle (20)	10		66.47
Narrow (40)	10		66.65
Middle (30)	10			79.28
Middle (40)	10			84.95
Wide (20)	10			86.49	86.49
Wide (30)	10				94.60
Wide (40)	10				95.39
Significance		1.000	0.093	0.247	0.056

Table 5.

Statistical difference of the lower surface of Esthet X

Wavelength (time)	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
Wavelength (time)	N	1	2	3	4	5	6
Narrow (20)	10	26.95
Narrow (30)	10		39.24
Middle (20)	10		44.60	44.60
Narrow (40)	10			51.43	51.43
Middle (30)	10				61.17	61.17
Wide (20)	10					64.79	64.79
Wide (30)	10					65.82	65.82
Middle (40)	10					67.91	67.91
Wide (40)	10						73.88
Significance		1.000	0.817	0.529	0.087	0.548	0.144

Table 6.

Degree of dye penetration in all groups

Wavelength (time)	Margin	N	Mean (S.D.)
Wide (20)	Occlusal	10	0.20 (0.42)
Wide (20)	Gingival	10	2.00 (1.05)
Wide (30)	Occlusal	10	0.10 (0.32)
Wide (30)	Gingival	10	2.30 (0.67)
Middle (40)	Occlusal	10	0.10 (0.32)
Middle (40)	Gingival	10	1.90 (0.57)
Wide (40)	Occlusal	10	0.10 (0.32)
Wide (40)	Gingival	10	2.60 (0.52)

Table 7.

Ranks of dye penetration (Kruskal-Wallis test)

Wavelength (time)	N	Mean Rank
Wide (20)	10	18.90
Wide (30)	10	21.60
Middle (40)	10	15.30
Wide (40)	10	26.20

Table 8.

Statistics of K-W test

	dye penetration
Chi-Square	5.523
df	3
Asymp. sig.	.137

Table 9.

Maximum gap of all groups (μ m)

Wavelength (time)	Margin	N	Mean (S.D.)
Wide (20)	Gingival	10	13.61 (11.28)
Wide (30)	Gingival	10	17.05 (12.21)
Middle (40)	Gingival	10	22.93 (24.31)
Wide (40)	Gingival	10	18.51 (19.66)

Table 10.

Homogeneous subset

Wavelength (time)	N	subset for alpha = .05
Wavelength (time)	N	1
Wide (20)	10	13.61
Wide (30)	10	17.05
Wide (40)	10	18.51
Middle (40)	10	22.93
Sig.		.711

Table 11.

Correlation between SEM and dye penetration

		Dye	SEM
Spearman’s rho Dye	Correlation	1.000	.061
	Coefficient
	Sig. (2-tailed)	) .	.707
	N	40	40

REFERENCES

1. Pradhan RD, Melikechi N, Eichmiller F. The effect of irradiation wavelength bandwidth and spot size on the scraping depth and temperature rise in composite exposed to an argon laser or a conventional quartz-tungsten-halogen source. Dent Mat 2002 May;18(3):221-226.Article PubMed
2. Cook WD. Spectral distribution of dental photopoly-merizing sources. J Dent Res 1982;61(12):1436-1438.Article PubMed PDF
3. Davidson CL, de Gee AJ, Feilzer A. The competition between the composite-dentin bond strength and the polymerization contraction stress. J Dent Res 1984;63(12):1396-1399.Article PubMed PDF
4. Davidson CL, de Gee AJ. Relaxation of polymerization contraction stresses by flow in dental composites. J Dent Res 1984;63:146-148.Article PubMed PDF
5. Tarle Z, Meniga A, Ristic M, Sutalo J, Pichler G, Davidson CL. The effect of the polymerization method on the quality of composite resin samples. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25(6):436-442.PubMed
6. Lutz F, Kreejei I, Luescher B, Oldenburg TR. Improved proximal margin adaptation of Class II composite restorations by use of light-reflecting wedges. Quintessence Int 1986;17:659-670.PubMed
7. Chan KC, Boyer DB. Curing light activated composite resin through dentin. J Pros Dent 1985;54:643-645.
8. Mehl A, Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH. Physical properties and gap formation of light-cured composites with and without‘soft-start polymerization’. J Dent Res 1997 May-Jul;25(3-4):321-330.Article PubMed
9. Friedl KH, Schmalz G, Hiller KA, Markl A. Marginal adaption of Class V restorations with and without “soft-start polymerization”. Oper Dent 2000 Jan-Feb;25(1):26-32.PubMed
10. Goracci G, Mori G, Casa de’Martinis L. Curing light intensity and marginal leakage of resin composite restorations. Quint Int 1996;27:355-362.
11. Suh BI, Cripe CA, Yin R. Light intensity and exposure time effects on light cured composites. J Dent Res 1998;77:Special issue B:Abst, No. #73.
12. Dennison JB, Yaman P, Seir R, Hamilton JC. Effect of variable light intensity on composite shrinkage. J Pros Dent 2000;84(5):499-505.Article PubMed
13. Kim HC, Cho KM, Shin DH. Microhardness of esthetic restorative materials cured by 3 types of narrow-banded wavelength. J Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2001;26(2):127-133.
14. Manhart J, Chen HY, Mehl A, Weber K, Hickel R. Marginal quality and microleakage of adhesive class V restorations. J Dent 2001;29:123-130.Article PubMed
15. Sakaguchi RL, Sasik CT, Bunczak MA, Douglas WH. Strain gauge method for measuring polymerization contraction of composite restoratives. J Dent 1991 Oct;19(5):312-326.Article PubMed
16. Ruggeberg FA. Effect of light-tip distance on polymerization of resin composite. Int J Prostho 1993;6:364-370.
17. Davidson CL, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymer-based restoratives. J Dent 1997 Nov;25(6):435-440.PubMed
18. Rueggeberg FA, Caughman WF, Curtis JW Jr, Davis HC. Factors affecting cure at depths within light-activated resin composites. Am J Dent 1993;6(2):91-95.PubMed
19. Bayne SC, Taylor DF. Dental materials. In: Sturdevant CM, Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Sturdevant Jr eds , editors. The art and sciences of operative dentistry. 1995. 3rd ed.. St. Louis: Mosby; 260.
20. Park SM, Shin DH. Microhardness and microleakage of composite resin according to the change of curing light intensity. J Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2001;26(5):363-371.
21. Ruggeberg FA. Factors affecting light transmission of single use, plastic light-curing tips. Oper Dent 1998 Jul;23(4):145-152.
22. Goracci G, Mori G. Esthetic and functional reproduction of occlusal morphology with composite resins. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1999 Jul;20(7):643-648.PubMed
23. Burgess JO, DeGoes M, Walker R, Ripps AH. An evaluation of four light-curing units comparing soft and hard curing. Pract Periodont Aesthet Dent 1999 Jan;11(1):125-132.
24. Uno S, Asmussen E. Marginal adaptation of a restorative resin polymerized at reduced rate. Scand J of Dent Res 1991;99:440-444.Article PubMed
25. Unterbrink GL, Muessner R. Influence of light intensity on two restorative systems. J Dent 1995 Jun;23(3):183-189.Article PubMed
26. Manabe A, Debari K, Itoh K, Hisamitsu H, Wakumoto S. Effect of delayed light curing of a resin composite on marginal integrity in cylindrical dentine cavities. J Dent 1993 Dec;21(6):344-349.Article PubMed
27. Friedl KH, Schmalz G, Hiller KA, M rkl A. Marginal adaptation of class V restorations with and without “softstart-polymerization”. Oper Dent 2000;25:26-32.PubMed
28. Nomoto R. Effect of light wavelength on polymerization of light-cured resins. Dent Mater 1997 Jun;16(1):60-73.Article PubMed
29. Blankenau EK. Wavelength and intensity of systems for visible light-curing composite resins: a comparison study. JADA 1983;106(4):471-474.PubMed
30. Iwami Y, Yamamoto H, Ebisu S. A new electrical method for detecting marginal leakage of in vitro resin restorations. J Dent 2000;28:241-247.Article PubMed
31. Santini A, Plasschaert AJM, Mitchell S. Effect of composite resin placement techniques on the microleakage of two self-etching dentin-bonding agents. Am J of Dent 2001;14(3):132-136.

Tables & Figures

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

MICROHARDNESS AND MICROLEAKAGE OF COMPOSITE RESIN CURED BY VISIBLE LIGHT WITH VARIOUS BAND OF WAVELENGTH

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2002;27(4):403-410. Published online January 14, 2002

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.4.403

XML Download

MICROHARDNESS AND MICROLEAKAGE OF COMPOSITE RESIN CURED BY VISIBLE LIGHT WITH VARIOUS BAND OF WAVELENGTH

Wavelength	Curing time (sec.)	Upper surface		Lower surface
Wavelength	Curing time (sec.)	DenFil	Esthet X	DenFil	Esthet X
Narrow	20	78.95 (2.09)	54.77 (2.81)	40.06 (3.39)	26.95 (4.96)
	30	86.87 (1.22)	58.25 (5.01)	58.26 (2.49)	39.24 (4.20)
	40	89.02 (4.36)	66.98 (5.73)	66.65 (4.54)	51.43 (5.38)
Middle	20	100.13 (4.78)	66.08 (5.64)	66.47 (3.53)	44.60 (3.17)
	30	96.73 (7.48)	81.28 (5.44)	84.95 (7.71)	67.91 (5.63)
	40	99.39 (5.68)	73.95 (2.03)	79.28 (4.87)	61.17 (2.70)
Wide	20	95.81 (7.18)	78.28 (3.82)	86.49 (7.14)	64.79 (5.76)
	30	104.40 (4.58)	83.55 (8.42)	95.39 (3.86)	73.88 (7.16)
	40	99.90 (6.83)	83.19 (9.71)	94.60 (4.72)	65.82 (9.48)

Wavelength (time)	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
Wavelength (time)	N	1	2	3	4
Narrow (20)	10	78.95
Narrow (30)	10	86.87	86.87
Narrow (40)	10		89.02	89.02
Wide (20)	10		95.81	95.81	95.81
Middle (40)	10			96.73	96.73
Middle (30)	10				99.39
Wide (30)	10				99.90
Middle (20)	10				100.13
Wide (40)	10				104.40
Significance		0.216	0.097	0.251	0.129

Wavelength (time)	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
Wavelength (time)	N	1	2	3	4
Narrow (20)	10	54.77
Narrow (30)	10	58.25	58.25
Middle (20)	10		66.08	66.08
Narrow (40)	10		66.98	66.98
Middle (30)	10			73.95	73.95
Wide (20)	10				78.28
Middle (40)	10				81.28
Wide (30)	10				83.19
Wide (40)	10				83.55
Significance		0.987	0.219	0.360	0.119

Wavelength (time)	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
Wavelength (time)	N	1	2	3	4
Narrow (20)	10	40.06
Narrow (30)	10		58.26
Middle (20)	10		66.47
Narrow (40)	10		66.65
Middle (30)	10			79.28
Middle (40)	10			84.95
Wide (20)	10			86.49	86.49
Wide (30)	10				94.60
Wide (40)	10				95.39
Significance		1.000	0.093	0.247	0.056

Wavelength (time)	N	Subset for alpha = 0.05
Wavelength (time)	N	1	2	3	4	5	6
Narrow (20)	10	26.95
Narrow (30)	10		39.24
Middle (20)	10		44.60	44.60
Narrow (40)	10			51.43	51.43
Middle (30)	10				61.17	61.17
Wide (20)	10					64.79	64.79
Wide (30)	10					65.82	65.82
Middle (40)	10					67.91	67.91
Wide (40)	10						73.88
Significance		1.000	0.817	0.529	0.087	0.548	0.144

Wavelength (time)	Margin	N	Mean (S.D.)
Wide (20)	Occlusal	10	0.20 (0.42)
Wide (20)	Gingival	10	2.00 (1.05)
Wide (30)	Occlusal	10	0.10 (0.32)
Wide (30)	Gingival	10	2.30 (0.67)
Middle (40)	Occlusal	10	0.10 (0.32)
Middle (40)	Gingival	10	1.90 (0.57)
Wide (40)	Occlusal	10	0.10 (0.32)
Wide (40)	Gingival	10	2.60 (0.52)

Wavelength (time)	N	Mean Rank
Wide (20)	10	18.90
Wide (30)	10	21.60
Middle (40)	10	15.30
Wide (40)	10	26.20

	dye penetration
Chi-Square	5.523
df	3
Asymp. sig.	.137

Wavelength (time)	Margin	N	Mean (S.D.)
Wide (20)	Gingival	10	13.61 (11.28)
Wide (30)	Gingival	10	17.05 (12.21)
Middle (40)	Gingival	10	22.93 (24.31)
Wide (40)	Gingival	10	18.51 (19.66)

Wavelength (time)	N	subset for alpha = .05
Wavelength (time)	N	1
Wide (20)	10	13.61
Wide (30)	10	17.05
Wide (40)	10	18.51
Middle (40)	10	22.93
Sig.		.711

		Dye	SEM
Spearman’s rho Dye	Correlation	1.000	.061
	Coefficient
	Sig. (2-tailed)	) .	.707
	N	40	40

Table 1. Microhardness values of groups (kg/mm2)

Table 2. Statistical difference of the upper surface of DenFil

Table 3. Statistical difference of the upper surface of Esthet X

Table 4. Statistical difference of the lower surface of DenFil

Table 5. Statistical difference of the lower surface of Esthet X

Table 6. Degree of dye penetration in all groups

Table 7. Ranks of dye penetration (Kruskal-Wallis test)

Table 8. Statistics of K-W test

Table 9. Maximum gap of all groups (μ m)

Table 10. Homogeneous subset

Table 11. Correlation between SEM and dye penetration