The effect of composite type on microhardness when using quartz-tungsten-halogen (QTH) or LED lights

dc.creatorPeris, AR
dc.creatorMitsui, FHO
dc.creatorAmaral, CM
dc.creatorAmbrosano, GMB
dc.creatorPimenta, LAF
dc.date2005
dc.dateSEP-OCT
dc.date2014-07-31T13:58:25Z
dc.date2015-11-26T16:58:11Z
dc.date2014-07-31T13:58:25Z
dc.date2015-11-26T16:58:11Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-28T23:45:49Z
dc.date.available2018-03-28T23:45:49Z
dc.identifierOperative Dentistry. Operative Dentistry Inc, v. 30, n. 5, n. 649, n. 654, 2005.
dc.identifier0361-7734
dc.identifierWOS:000232117500012
dc.identifierhttp://www.repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/75029
dc.identifierhttp://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/75029
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/1277867
dc.descriptionThis study evaluates the Knoop microhardness of resin composites cured with different light-emitting diode (LED) based light curing units (LCU) or with a conventional quartz-tungsten-halogen light QTH). Ten experimental groups with 10 specimens each were used. The specimens were prepared by placing two light-cured resin composites with similar VITA shade A2-microhybrid Filtek Z250/3M ESPE and microfill Durafil VS/Heraeus Kulzer - in a 2.0 mm-thick disc shaped mold. The specimens were polymerized for 40 seconds with the use of one QTH LCU (Optilux 501/Kerr-Demetron) and four LED LCUs: Elipar FreeLight I Cordless LED (3M ESPE), Ultrablue II LED with cord (DMC), Ultrablue III LED cordless (DMQ and LEC 470 I (MM Optics). Knoop microhardness was determined at the top and bottom surfaces of the specimens 24 hours following curing. Microhardness values in the microhybrid resin composite group showed no statistically significant differences when cured with LED FreeLight I LCU and QTH LCU (p < 0.05). The other LED devices evaluated in the study presented lower microhardness values in both surfaces (p < 0.05) when compared to QTH. In the microfill resin composite group, no statistically significant differences were observed among all LCUs evaluated on the bottom surfaces (p<0.05). However, on the top surfaces, QTH presented the highest KHN values, and the LED devices presented similar results when compared with KHN values relative to each other (p < 0.05).
dc.description30
dc.description5
dc.description649
dc.description654
dc.languageen
dc.publisherOperative Dentistry Inc
dc.publisherIndianapolis
dc.publisherÍndia
dc.relationOperative Dentistry
dc.relationOper. Dent.
dc.rightsfechado
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.subjectActivated Resin Composites
dc.subjectPrivate Dental Offices
dc.subjectCuring Units
dc.subjectEmitting-diodes
dc.subjectCompressive Strength
dc.subjectKnoop-hardness
dc.subjectCure
dc.subjectPolymerization
dc.subjectDepth
dc.subjectIntensity
dc.titleThe effect of composite type on microhardness when using quartz-tungsten-halogen (QTH) or LED lights
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución