Ability of Six Curing Lights to Photocure Four Resin-Based Composites in a MOD-Mold: A Double-Blind Study.

IF 1.1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1922/EJPRD_2661Comisi13

J C Comisi, R B Price, K Kinley-Howard, C Maucoski, E Rader

{"title":"Ability of Six Curing Lights to Photocure Four Resin-Based Composites in a MOD-Mold: A Double-Blind Study.","authors":"J C Comisi, R B Price, K Kinley-Howard, C Maucoski, E Rader","doi":"10.1922/EJPRD_2661Comisi13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The ability of six curing lights to photocure four resin-based composites (RBCs) in a mold simulating a cavity was compared visually.Materials and methods: Four RBCs were photocured using the: Woodpecker B for 2x10s, SmartLite Pro 2x10s, Valo Cordless 2x10s, Valo Cordless 2x3s Xtra power, Valo X 2x10s, Valo X 2x5s Xtra power, PowerCure 2x3s mode, Monet 1x1s and Monet 3x1s, in a mold representing a molar Class II restoration. Immediately after photocuring, the RBC specimens were immersed in a solvent to remove the uncured RBC, after which they were photographed and de-identified. Using a REDCap survey, these images were compared visually to compare the ability of the LCUs to photocure the restorations.Results: There were significant differences in how well the LCUs had photocured the RBCs. The SmartLite Pro and Valo X used for two 10s exposures produced restorations rated as the best cured, and the Monet used for 1 s was rated the worst.Conclusions: There were visually apparent differences in how well the LCUs could photocure the RBCs. The Monet used for 1 second produced the worst results for all four RBCs.","PeriodicalId":45686,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2661Comisi13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The ability of six curing lights to photocure four resin-based composites (RBCs) in a mold simulating a cavity was compared visually.

Materials and methods: Four RBCs were photocured using the: Woodpecker B for 2x10s, SmartLite Pro 2x10s, Valo Cordless 2x10s, Valo Cordless 2x3s Xtra power, Valo X 2x10s, Valo X 2x5s Xtra power, PowerCure 2x3s mode, Monet 1x1s and Monet 3x1s, in a mold representing a molar Class II restoration. Immediately after photocuring, the RBC specimens were immersed in a solvent to remove the uncured RBC, after which they were photographed and de-identified. Using a REDCap survey, these images were compared visually to compare the ability of the LCUs to photocure the restorations.

Results: There were significant differences in how well the LCUs had photocured the RBCs. The SmartLite Pro and Valo X used for two 10s exposures produced restorations rated as the best cured, and the Monet used for 1 s was rated the worst.

Conclusions: There were visually apparent differences in how well the LCUs could photocure the RBCs. The Monet used for 1 second produced the worst results for all four RBCs.

查看原文本刊更多论文

六种固化灯在 MOD 模中光固化四种树脂基复合材料的能力：双盲研究

目标：目测比较六种固化灯在模拟空腔的模具中光固化四种树脂基复合材料 (RBC) 的能力：使用以下光固化灯对四种 RBC 进行光固化：材料：在代表臼齿 II 级修复体的模具中，使用 Woodpecker B for 2x10s、SmartLite Pro 2x10s、Valo Cordless 2x10s、Valo Cordless 2x3s Xtra power、Valo X 2x10s、Valo X 2x5s Xtra power、PowerCure 2x3s 模式、Monet 1x1s 和 Monet 3x1s，对四种 RBC 进行光固化。光固化后，立即将 RBC 试样浸入溶剂中以去除未固化的 RBC，然后对其进行拍照和去标识。使用 REDCap 调查对这些图像进行直观比较，以比较 LCU 光固化修复体的能力：结果： LCU 对 RBC 进行光固化的能力差异很大。使用 SmartLite Pro 和 Valo X 进行两次 10 秒钟曝光后，修复体的光固化效果被评为最佳，而使用 Monet 进行 1 秒钟曝光后，修复体的光固化效果被评为最差：LCU 对 RBC 的光固化效果存在明显差异。在所有四种 RBC 中，使用 1 秒钟的莫奈效果最差。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-

CiteScore

2.30

自引率

7.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry is published quarterly and includes clinical and research articles in subjects such as prosthodontics, operative dentistry, implantology, endodontics, periodontics and dental materials.