Evaluation of effect of different disposable infection control barriers on light intensity of light-curing unit and microhardness of composite - An in vitro study

Effect of duration and infection control barriers of light curing unit on hardness of Bulk Fill composite resin

Background

This study aimed to investigate the impact of the duration of light curing unit (LCU) usage and the use of infection control barriers on the hardness of Bulk Fill composite resin after curing. The hypotheses were that extended usage of the LCU would not reduces its output power and resin hardness, and that the presence of polyethylene film barriers exacerbates the reduction in resin hardness.

Methods

Based on the absence or presence of polyethylene film (PE) and the number of layers used, a 3M LED curing light (EliparTM DeepCure-S; 3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) was divided into three groups: PE0, PE1, and PE3. The curing light was used 30 times daily for 20 s per exposure, at frequencies of 0, 6, and 12 months. Maximum output power tests were conducted for each group of curing lights. Custom-made plastic modules were used to stack Bulk Fill composite resin (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative; 3M ESPE) to a thickness of 4 mm. Each group of curing lights was used to cure the modules in a direct contact manner for 20 s. Vickers hardness measurements were taken at the top and bottom surfaces of the resin specimens using a digital microhardness tester. A one-way or two-way ANOVA analyzed the power of LCUs, Vickers hardness of Bulk Fill composite resin, and hardness decrease percentage across groups. Pairwise comparisons used the Tukey test (α = 0.05).

Results

As the duration of usage increased, both the power of the curing light and the hardness of the resin significantly decreased. Significant differences were observed in power and resin hardness among the PE0, PE1, and PE3 groups. When the duration of usage was 6 months or less, only multi-layered PE films led to a significant increase in the percentage decrease of hardness of cured resin from top to bottom. However, at 12 months, both single-layer and multi-layered PE films resulted in a significant increase in the percentage decrease of hardness of cured resin from top to bottom.

Conclusion

The output power of the light curing unit decreases with prolonged usage, thereby failing to meet the curing requirements of Bulk Fill composite resin. The use of single-layer PE as an infection control barrier is recommended.

[Light-curing effectiveness using led lamps: a review]

Introduction

LED lamps have a new light-curing technology which can be monowave or polywave, which allows it to reach more initiators such as camphorquinone, Lucirin TPO and Propanodione, which have a wide variety of advantages and disadvantages. These lamps have evolved over time, as have different ergonomics, longevity, systems and quality standards.

Objective

The objective of this literature review is to improve the clinician on the proper use of different LED lamps and how they influence the efficiency of resin photopolymerization.

Material and methods

Extensive research has been carried out in the existing literature on this topic. From the beginning of this information until April 18, 2022, the bibliographic search carried out includes 86 articles published in the Medline database through PubMed, LILACS, Science Direct and SciELO, and there is no language restriction.

Results

The photopolymerization effects of Polywave and Monowave LED lamps present significant differences between the compressive strength of the light-cured resin, with single-wave and polyvalent LED lamps where the types of light and lamp directly influence the compressive strength of the resin. composite resins.

Conclusion

The type of light and lamp directly affects the efficiency of the photopolymerization of the composite resin, so it is concluded that LED lamps with single wave technology (Monowave) produce a greater depth of photopolymerization than those with multiple wave technology (Polywave).

Assessment of the radiant emittance of damaged/contaminated dental light-curing tips by spectrophotometric methods

Objectives

This study investigated the effects of physically damaged and resin-contaminated tips on radiant emittance, comparing them with new undamaged, non-contaminated tips using 3 pieces of spectrophotometric laboratory equipment.

Materials and Methods

Nine tips with damage and/or resin contaminants from actual clinical situations were compared with a new tip without damage or contamination (control group). The radiant emittance was recorded using 3 spectrophotometric methods: a laboratory-grade thermopile, a laboratory-grade integrating sphere, and a portable light collector (checkMARC).

Results

A significant difference between the laboratory-grade thermopile and the laboratory-grade integrating sphere was found when the radiant emittance values of the control or damaged/contaminated tips were investigated (p < 0.05), but both methods were comparable to checkMARC (p > 0.05). Regardless of the method used to quantify the light output, the mean radiant emittance values of the damaged/contaminated tips were significantly lower than those of the control (p < 0.05). The beam profile of the damaged/contaminated tips was less homogeneous than that of the control.

Conclusions

Damaged/contaminated tips can reduce the radiant emittance output and the homogeneity of the beam, which may affect the energy delivered to composite restorations. The checkMARC spectrophotometer device can be used in dental offices, as it provided values close to those produced by a laboratory-grade integrated sphere spectrophotometer. Dentists should assess the radiant emittance of their light-curing units to ensure optimal curing in photoactivated, resin-based materials.

Infection Control Barrier and Curing Time as Factors Affecting the Irradiance of Light-Cure Units

Objective

The objective of the study is to investigate the effect of infection control barrier (ICB) and curing time on irradiance of light cure units (LCUs).

Methods

Irradiance (mW/cm²) of the LCUs at a government dental school were recorded with and without ICB at 0 (T₀), 10 (T₁₀), and 20 (T₂₀) seconds using a digital radiometer. Data were analyzed using IBM^® SPSS^® Statistics Version 17 for Windows software for the analysis of variance and Bonferroni methods at 0.05 significance level.

Results

Using ICB resulted in a statistically significant effect on the irradiance mean (P < 0.01). A significant difference existed between the four different brands of LCUs at different time intervals, irrespective of the use of ICB. At T₀ and T₁₀, the mean output of Acteon mini-light-emitting diode (LED) was significantly higher than that of either the Kerr Demi Ultra or the Kavo Polylux II. At T₂₀, E-Morlit's mean irradiance was significantly higher than that of Kerr Demi Ultra, which in turn was significantly higher than that of the Kavo PolyLux II. The mean irradiance of the LEDs was significantly higher than that of the halogens irrespective of barrier placement and at all-time points.

Conclusion

The ICB used in this study resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the irradiance output. No significant difference in the irradiance was found at different curing time intervals for the tested units regardless of ICB usage.