Atria Pablo J, Sampaio Camila S, Cáceres Eduardo, Fernández Jessica, Reis Andre F, Giannini Marcelo, Coelho Paulo G, Hirata Ronaldo
Department of Biomaterials and Biomimetics, New York University College of Dentistry.
Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de los Andes.
Dent Mater J. 2018 Jan 30;37(1):33-39. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2016-430. Epub 2017 Oct 27.
This study evaluated the influence of different light-curing modes on the volumetric polymerization shrinkage and degree of conversion of a composite resin at different locations using micro-computed tomography and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Specimens were divided into 4 groups based on the light-curing mode used (Bluephase 20i): 1 -High (1,200 mW/cm); 2 -Low (650 mW/cm); 3 -Soft-start (650-1,200 mW/cm); and 4 -Turbo (2,000 mW/cm). Degree of conversion was calculated by the measurement of the peak absorbance height of the uncured and cured materials at the specific wavenumbers, and was performed by FTIR 48 h after curing resin samples. Degree of conversion was analyzed using two-way ANOVA. No significant differences were observed independent of the region of the restoration investigated (p>0.05). Different curing modes did not influence volumetric shrinkage neither degree of conversion of class I composite resin restorations.
本研究使用微型计算机断层扫描和傅里叶变换红外光谱(FTIR)评估了不同光固化模式对复合树脂在不同位置的体积聚合收缩率和转化率的影响。根据所使用的光固化模式(Bluephase 20i)将样本分为4组:1 -高(1200 mW/cm);2 -低(650 mW/cm);3 -软启动(650 - 1200 mW/cm);4 -涡轮(2000 mW/cm)。通过测量未固化和固化材料在特定波数下的峰值吸光度高度来计算转化率,并在树脂样品固化48小时后通过FTIR进行。使用双向方差分析对转化率进行分析。在所研究的修复体区域中未观察到显著差异(p>0.05)。不同的固化模式对I类复合树脂修复体的体积收缩率和转化率均无影响。