• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.126-133
• /
• 1992

Tooth colored resin restorative materials are widely used in anterior teeth restorations. The color instability of resin was the main cause of failure in resin restorations. The purpose of this study was to investigate color stability and microhardness of serval visible light curing resins. Colorimetric measurements(Tokyo Denshoku Co., Japan) and microhardness tests(Matusuzawa, MXT 70, Japan) were made on six composite resins before and after controlled immersion treatments. The six composite resins were BIS - FILM(BISCO, USA), Durafill(Kulzer, Germany), Helioprogess(VIVADENT, Germany), Palfique(TOKUYAMA SODA, Japan), Silux(3M, USA), Photoclearfil(KURARAY, Japen). Six light curing resins showed significant color change after 2 weeks. Palfique exhibited the hightest $dE^*$ values and Helio progress presented the lowest $dE^*$ values. Photoclearfil showed the highest microhardness value. Durafill and Helio progress showed lower microhardness values. Microhardness values were decreased after 8 weeks in Bisfil, Palfique light, and Photoclearfil.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.354-359
• /
• 2003

This study evaluated the effectiveness of the light emitting diode(LED) units for composite curing. To compare its effectiveness with conventional quartz tungsten halogen (QTH) light curing unit. the microhardness of 2mm composite. Z250, which had been light cured by the LEDs (Ultralume LED2, FreeLight, Developing product Dl) or QTH (XL 3000) were compared on the upper and lower surface. One way ANOVA with Tukey and Paired t-test was used at 95% levels of confidence. In addition. the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was compared between composites which were light cured by QTH or LEDs using a custom-made linometer in 10s and 60s of light curing, and the amount of linear polymerization shrinkage was compared by one way ANOVA with Tukey. The amount of polymerization shrinkage at 10s was XL3000 > Ultralume 2. 40. 60 > FreeLight, D1 (P<0.05) The amount of polymerization shrinkage at 60s was XL3000 > Ultralume 2, 60> Ultralume 2.40 > FreeLight, D1 (P<0.05) The microhardness on the upper and lower surface was as follows ; (equation omitted) It was concluded that the LEDs produced lower polymerization shrinkage in 10s and 60s compared with QTH unit. In addition. the microhardness of samples which had been cured with LEDs was lower on the lower surfaces than the upper surfaces whereas there was no difference in QTH cured samples.