A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
Photopolymerization of Light Curing Adhesives Used with Metal Orthodontic Brackets and Matrices
Tekijät: Kilponen L, Uusitalo E, Tolvanen M, Varrela J, Vallittu PK
Kustantaja: AMER SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHERS
Julkaisuvuosi: 2016
Journal: Journal of Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering
Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimi: JOURNAL OF BIOMATERIALS AND TISSUE ENGINEERING
Lehden akronyymi: J BIOMATER TISS ENG
Vuosikerta: 6
Numero: 8
Aloitussivu: 659
Lopetussivu: 664
Sivujen määrä: 6
ISSN: 2157-9083
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1166/jbt.2016.1483
Tiivistelmä
Objective: To measure the degree of conversion (DC%) of light-curing orthodontic adhesives under both orthodontic brackets and metal matrices. In addition, the transmission of curing light through dentin slices of different thicknesses was evaluated. Methods: Two light-curing dimethacrylate adhesives (Transbond (TM) XT and Enlight) were each tested in 11 groups (n = 5/group): a control group (without a bracket), under a bracket, and under four different sized pieces of dental matrices shielding the resin from light curing. Additional groups contained a continuous E-glass-fiber weave in the adhesive interface. The adhesives were light-cured for 40 s and the DC% was measured with FT-IR. The transmission of curing light was measured through slices of dentin (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 mm). Results: Both bracket and metal matrices prevented the DC% of the adhesive from reaching the DC% of the control. Transbond (TM) showed lower DC% than Enlight. The DC% was higher with a piece of glass-fiber weave (p < 0.05). Dentin slices influenced transmission of curing light significantly with a decrease from 1845 mW/cm(2) to zero through dentine slice of 4.0 mm. Conclusions: The photopolymerization of light curing adhesives was influenced by the light shielding effect of both the metal brackets and the matrices. Dentine slices attenuated the curing light.
Objective: To measure the degree of conversion (DC%) of light-curing orthodontic adhesives under both orthodontic brackets and metal matrices. In addition, the transmission of curing light through dentin slices of different thicknesses was evaluated. Methods: Two light-curing dimethacrylate adhesives (Transbond (TM) XT and Enlight) were each tested in 11 groups (n = 5/group): a control group (without a bracket), under a bracket, and under four different sized pieces of dental matrices shielding the resin from light curing. Additional groups contained a continuous E-glass-fiber weave in the adhesive interface. The adhesives were light-cured for 40 s and the DC% was measured with FT-IR. The transmission of curing light was measured through slices of dentin (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 mm). Results: Both bracket and metal matrices prevented the DC% of the adhesive from reaching the DC% of the control. Transbond (TM) showed lower DC% than Enlight. The DC% was higher with a piece of glass-fiber weave (p < 0.05). Dentin slices influenced transmission of curing light significantly with a decrease from 1845 mW/cm(2) to zero through dentine slice of 4.0 mm. Conclusions: The photopolymerization of light curing adhesives was influenced by the light shielding effect of both the metal brackets and the matrices. Dentine slices attenuated the curing light.
Turun yliopiston Tutkimustietojärjestelmän portaali