Uhl Alexander, Mills Robin W, Vowles Richard W, Jandt Klaus D
Department of Materials Science and Technology, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Löbdergraben 32, D-07743 Jena, Germany.
J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;63(6):729-38. doi: 10.1002/jbm.10390.
After the first light-emitting diode (LED) light curing units (LCUs) became available commercially, a comparison of mechanical properties between materials polymerized with conventional halogen lamps and this new technology was required. This study, therefore, investigated the curing performance of two conventional commercial halogen LCUs (Translux CL, Spectrum800), a custom-made LED LCU prototype, and one of the first commercially available LED LCUs (LUXoMAX). The Spectrum800 was adjusted to a similar irradiance to the custom-made LED LCU prototype. Both technologies were compared by measuring compressive strength and Knoop hardness depth profiles for selected dental composites polymerized for 20 or 40 s. Four dental composites (Z100, Spectrum TPH, Solitaire2, and Definite) were used. Two of these composites (Solitaire2 and Definite) contain co-initiators in addition to the standard photoinitiator camphorquinone. In general, the material hardness obtained with the LUXoMAX was statistically significantly (p < 0.05) lower at the depths of 0.1, 1.0, 1.9, and 3.1 mm, for all composites and curing times, than for the other three LCUs. The LED LCU prototype achieved, with one exception, up to a depth of 1.9 mm a material hardness for the composites Z100, Spectrum TPH and Solitaire2 that was not statistically significant different (p < 0.05) from the hardness obtained with the halogen LCUs. At a greater depth (3.1 mm), however, the LED LCU prototype showed statistically significantly lower hardness values than the halogen units. The compressive strength test showed at a 95% confidence level that similar compressive strengths were achieved with the LCUs LUXoMAX and Spectrum800, and the Translux and LED LCU prototype.
在首批发光二极管（LED）光固化机（LCU）投入商业使用后，有必要对用传统卤素灯聚合的材料与这项新技术聚合的材料的机械性能进行比较。因此，本研究调查了两款传统商用卤素LCU（Translux CL、Spectrum800）、一款定制的LED LCU原型以及首批商用LED LCU之一（LUXoMAX）的固化性能。将Spectrum800的辐照度调整至与定制的LED LCU原型相似。通过测量选定的牙科复合材料在聚合20秒或40秒后的抗压强度和努氏硬度深度分布，对这两种技术进行了比较。使用了四种牙科复合材料（Z100、Spectrum TPH、Solitaire2和Definite）。其中两种复合材料（Solitaire2和Definite）除了标准光引发剂樟脑醌外还含有共引发剂。总体而言，对于所有复合材料和固化时间，在0.1、1.0、1.9和3.1毫米深度处，LUXoMAX获得的材料硬度在统计学上显著低于（p<0.05）其他三款LCU。LED LCU原型在深度达1.9毫米时，对于复合材料Z100、Spectrum TPH和Solitaire2所获得的材料硬度，与用卤素LCU获得的硬度相比，在统计学上无显著差异（p<0.05），只有一个例外。然而，在更深的深度（3.1毫米），LED LCU原型的硬度值在统计学上显著低于卤素装置。抗压强度测试表明，在95%置信水平下，LCU LUXoMAX和Spectrum800以及Translux和LED LCU原型实现了相似的抗压强度。
