Loading…
Effect of light irradiation condition on gap formation under polymeric dental restoration; OCT study
To investigate the effect of two light-curing systems; quartz tungsten-halogen (QTH) and light-emitting diode (LED), and irradiation time on interfacial gap formation of dental composite resin restorations bonded with an adhesive resin using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Forty cavities were pr...
Saved in:
Published in: | Zeitschrift für medizinische Physik 2020-08, Vol.30 (3), p.194-200 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | To investigate the effect of two light-curing systems; quartz tungsten-halogen (QTH) and light-emitting diode (LED), and irradiation time on interfacial gap formation of dental composite resin restorations bonded with an adhesive resin using optical coherence tomography (OCT).
Forty cavities were prepared in extracted human molar teeth and divided into four groups (n=10) based on the type of light curing system QTH (LITEX 680A) and LED (Demi Plus) and curing duration (10 s or 40 s). A single-step self-etching dental adhesive (Tetric® N-Bond; Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, FL, Liechtenstein) was applied and polymerized with QTH for 10 s (QTH-10), or for 40 s (QTH-40). Similarly, the adhesive in LED-10 and LED-40 groups was polymerized with an LED for 10 s or 40 s, respectively. Then, all specimens were restored with Filtek™ Z350 XT flowable composite (3M ESPE AG, St. Paul, MN, USA) and immersed in ammoniacal silver-nitrate contrasting solution. Cross-sectional images were recorded at every 250μm using cross-polarization OCT system (CP-OCT; IVS-300, Santec, Komaki, Aichi, Japan). Image analysis to quantify the percentage of gap at resin-dentin interface was performed using a custom plugin for ImageJ software.
Data analysis using one-way ANOVA showed a significant difference in mean gap percentage between the four test groups (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0939-3889 1876-4436 1876-4436 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.zemedi.2020.02.001 |