Comparison of linear polymerization shrinkage in composites and compomer polymerized by plasma arc or conventional visible light curing

Jae-Ik Lee; Sung-Ho Park

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.5.488

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 27(5); 2002 > Article

Original Article Comparison of linear polymerization shrinkage in composites and compomer polymerized by plasma arc or conventional visible light curing: Jae-Ik Lee, Sung-Ho Park; 2002;27(5):-492.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.5.488
Published online: September 30, 2002

Department of Conservatine Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Yonsei University, Korea.

112 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of plasma arc curing (PAC) unit for composite and compomer curing. To compare its effectiveness with conventional quartz tungsten halogen (QTH) light curing unit, the polymerization shrinkage rates and amounts of three composites (Z100, Z250, Synergy Duo Shade) and one compomer, that had been light cured by PAC unit or QTH unit, was compared using a custome made linometer. The measurement of polymerization shrinkage was performed after polymerization with either QTH unit or PAC unit. In case of curing with the PAC unit, the composite was light cured with Apollo 95E for 6s, the power density of which was recorded as 1350 mW/cm² by Coltolux Light Meter. For light curing with QTH unit, the composite was light cured for 30s with the XL2500, the power density of which was recorded as 800 mW/cm² by Coltolux Light Meter. The amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was recorded in the computer every 0.5s for 60s. Ten measurements were made for each material. The amount of linear polymerization shrinkage for each material in 10s and 60s which were cured with PAC or QTH unit were compared with t test. The amount of polymerization shrinkage in the tested materials were compared with 1way ANOVA with Duncan's multiple range test.

As for the amounts of polymerization shrinkage in 60s, there was no difference between PAC unit and QTH unit in Z250 and Synergy Duo Shade. In Z100 and Dyract AP, it was lower when it was cured with PAC unit than when it was cured with QTH unit (p<0.05).

As for the amounts of polymerization shrinkage in 10s, there was no difference between PAC unit and QTH unit in Z100 and Dyract AP. The amounts of polymerization shrinkage was significantly higher when it was cured with PAC unit in Z250 and Synergy Duo Shade (p<0.05). The amounts of polymerization shrinkage in the tested materials when they were cured with QTH unit were Z250 (6.6um) < Z100 (9.3um), Dyract AP (9.7um) < Synergy Duo Shade (11.2um) (p<0.05). The amount of polymerization shrinkage when the materials were cured with PAC unit were Dyract AP (5.6um) < Z100 (8.1um), Z250(7.0um) < Synergy Duo Shade (11.2um) (p<0.05).

Fig. 1

Schematic diagram of custome made linometer

Fig. 2

Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Z100 that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 3

Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Z250 that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 4

Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Synergy Duo shade that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 5

Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Dyract AP that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Table 1

List of composites and compomer which was used un this study

Table 2

Amounts of linear shrinkage that was measured at 60s (um) (^*:p<0.05)

Table 3

Amounts of linear shrinkage that was measured at 10s (um) (^*:p<0.05)

Table 4

Amounts of linear shrinkage at 10s / Amounts of linear shrinkage at 60s of light curing (%)

REFERENCES

1. Sakaguchi RL, Peters MC, Nelson SR, Douglas WH, Poort HW. Effects of polymerization contraction in composite restorations. J Dent. 1992;20: 178-182.Article PubMed
2. Attin T, Buchalla W, Kielbassa AM, Helwig E. Curing shrinkage and volumetric changes of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. Dent Mater. 1995;11: 359-362.Article PubMed
3. Kinomoto Y, Torii M, Takeshige F, Ebisu S. Comparison of polymerization contraction stresses between self- and light-curing composites. J Dent. 1999;27: 383-389.Article PubMed
4. Brännström M, Vajinovic O. Response of the dental pulp to invasion of bacteria around three filling materials. ASDC J Dent Child. 1976;43: 83-89.PubMed
5. 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: 1396-1399.Article PubMed PDF
6. Jorgensen KD, Asmussen E, Shimokobe H. Enamel damages caused by contracting restorative resins. Scand J Dent Res. 1975;83: 120-122.Article PubMed
7. 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
8. Hay JN, Shortall AC. Polymerization contraction and reaction kinetics of three chemically activated restorative resins. J Dent. 1988;16: 172-176.Article PubMed
9. de Gee AJ, Feilzer AJ, Davidson CL. True linear polymerization shrinkage of unfilled resins and composites determined with a linometer. Dent Mater. 1993;9: 11-14.Article PubMed
10. Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A, Asmussen E. Characterization of resin composites polymerized with plasma arc curing units. Dent Mater. 2000;16: 330-336.Article PubMed
11. Stritikus J, Owen B. An in vitro study of microleakage of occlusal composite restorations polymerized by a conventional curring light and a PAC curing light. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2000;24: 221-227.PubMed
12. Munksgaard EC, Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Elution of TEGDMA and BisGMA from a resin and a resin composite cured with halogen or plasma light. Eur J Oral Sci. 2000;108: 341-345.Article PubMed PDF
13. Smith DL, Schoonover IG. Direct filling resins: dimensional changes resulting from polymerization shrinkage and water sorption. JADA. 1953;46: 540-544.Article PubMed
14. Puckett AD, Smith R. Method to measure the polymerization shrinkage of light-cured composites. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;68: 56-58.PubMed
15. Park SH, Krejci I, Lutz F. A Comparison of microhardeness of resin composites polymerized by plasma arc or conventional visible light curing. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 30-37.PubMed
16. Lee IB. A new method-Real time measurement of the initial dynamic volumetric shrinkage of composite resins during polymerization shrinkage. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2001;26: 134-140.

Tables & Figures

Fig. 1

Schematic diagram of custome made linometer

Fig. 2

Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Z100 that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 3

Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Z250 that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 4

Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Synergy Duo shade that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 5

Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Dyract AP that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Table 1

List of composites and compomer which was used un this study

Table 2

Amounts of linear shrinkage that was measured at 60s (um) (^*:p<0.05)

Table 3

Amounts of linear shrinkage that was measured at 10s (um) (^*:p<0.05)

Table 4

Amounts of linear shrinkage at 10s / Amounts of linear shrinkage at 60s of light curing (%)

REFERENCES

1. Sakaguchi RL, Peters MC, Nelson SR, Douglas WH, Poort HW. Effects of polymerization contraction in composite restorations. J Dent. 1992;20: 178-182.Article PubMed
2. Attin T, Buchalla W, Kielbassa AM, Helwig E. Curing shrinkage and volumetric changes of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. Dent Mater. 1995;11: 359-362.Article PubMed
3. Kinomoto Y, Torii M, Takeshige F, Ebisu S. Comparison of polymerization contraction stresses between self- and light-curing composites. J Dent. 1999;27: 383-389.Article PubMed
4. Brännström M, Vajinovic O. Response of the dental pulp to invasion of bacteria around three filling materials. ASDC J Dent Child. 1976;43: 83-89.PubMed
5. 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: 1396-1399.Article PubMed PDF
6. Jorgensen KD, Asmussen E, Shimokobe H. Enamel damages caused by contracting restorative resins. Scand J Dent Res. 1975;83: 120-122.Article PubMed
7. 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
8. Hay JN, Shortall AC. Polymerization contraction and reaction kinetics of three chemically activated restorative resins. J Dent. 1988;16: 172-176.Article PubMed
9. de Gee AJ, Feilzer AJ, Davidson CL. True linear polymerization shrinkage of unfilled resins and composites determined with a linometer. Dent Mater. 1993;9: 11-14.Article PubMed
10. Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A, Asmussen E. Characterization of resin composites polymerized with plasma arc curing units. Dent Mater. 2000;16: 330-336.Article PubMed
11. Stritikus J, Owen B. An in vitro study of microleakage of occlusal composite restorations polymerized by a conventional curring light and a PAC curing light. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2000;24: 221-227.PubMed
12. Munksgaard EC, Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Elution of TEGDMA and BisGMA from a resin and a resin composite cured with halogen or plasma light. Eur J Oral Sci. 2000;108: 341-345.Article PubMed PDF
13. Smith DL, Schoonover IG. Direct filling resins: dimensional changes resulting from polymerization shrinkage and water sorption. JADA. 1953;46: 540-544.Article PubMed
14. Puckett AD, Smith R. Method to measure the polymerization shrinkage of light-cured composites. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;68: 56-58.PubMed
15. Park SH, Krejci I, Lutz F. A Comparison of microhardeness of resin composites polymerized by plasma arc or conventional visible light curing. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 30-37.PubMed
16. Lee IB. A new method-Real time measurement of the initial dynamic volumetric shrinkage of composite resins during polymerization shrinkage. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2001;26: 134-140.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

CanvasJS.com

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

Comparison of linear polymerization shrinkage in composites and compomer polymerized by plasma arc or conventional visible light curing

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2002;27(5):488-492. Published online September 30, 2002

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.5.488

XML Download

Figure

Comparison of linear polymerization shrinkage in composites and compomer polymerized by plasma arc or conventional visible light curing

Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of custome made linometer

Fig. 2 Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Z100 that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 3 Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Z250 that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 4 Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Synergy Duo shade that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 5 Change in the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage versus time in Dyract AP that was light cured with Apollo 95E or XL2500

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Comparison of linear polymerization shrinkage in composites and compomer polymerized by plasma arc or conventional visible light curing

Table 1

List of composites and compomer which was used un this study

Table 2

Amounts of linear shrinkage that was measured at 60s (um) (^*:p<0.05)

Table 3

Amounts of linear shrinkage that was measured at 10s (um) (^*:p<0.05)

Table 4

Amounts of linear shrinkage at 10s / Amounts of linear shrinkage at 60s of light curing (%)

Table 1 List of composites and compomer which was used un this study

Table 2 Amounts of linear shrinkage that was measured at 60s (um) (*:p<0.05)

Table 3 Amounts of linear shrinkage that was measured at 10s (um) (*:p<0.05)

Table 4 Amounts of linear shrinkage at 10s / Amounts of linear shrinkage at 60s of light curing (%)