Balestrino Amy, Veríssimo Crisnicaw, Tantbirojn Daranee, Garcia-Godoy Franklin, Soares Carlos J, Versluis Antheunis
College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
School of Dentistry, University of Uberaba, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Am J Dent. 2016 Aug;29(4):234-2240.
To investigate temperature rise, separating heat caused by irradiation and exotherm for three composites polymerized with three curing lights. The effect of substrate on temperature measurements was also determined.
Composite samples (n= 5) (Filtek Supreme Ultra, Filtek LS, and EsthetX HD) were placed on a thermocouple tip inside three substrates (aluminum, Delrin, and tooth). The composites were photoactivated using three curing lights (Elipar 2500 QTH, SmartLite Max LED, DemiUltra LED) at 1 mm distance. Irradiance was 798, 980, and 1,135 mW/cm2, respectively. Exotherm was determined by subtracting post-cure from the polymerization temperature curves. ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls post-hoc tests were used to analyze differences among peak temperatures and exotherms (significance level 0.05).
SmartLite LED curing light resulted in higher peak temperatures and exotherms compared to the DemiUltra LED and QTH for all tested composites (16.9-20.4°C vs 12.3-14.7°C vs 8.9-9.7°C). Thus, the LEDs produced higher temperature rises than the QTH, and the LED with lower irradiance caused higher temperature rise than the LED with higher irradiance. The silorane-based Filtek LS generated significantly higher exotherm than the methacrylate-based EsthetX HD and Filtek Supreme Ultra (6.2-7.6°C vs 3.6-4.5°C vs 2.7-3.6°C). Substrate affected temperatures significantly. Temperature profiles found in Delrin substrate were comparable to tooth substrate, while aluminum substrate reduced temperatures 10-20 degrees.
Curing of restorative composites raises the temperature under a restoration due to irradiation and exothermic reaction; how much the temperature increases depends on curing light design, type of composite, and surrounding substrate. The silorane-based Filtek LS generated significantly higher exotherm than the methacrylate-based EsthetX HD and Filtek Supreme Ultra.
研究三种复合树脂在三种固化灯照射下的温度升高情况，区分照射产生的热量和放热情况。同时确定基底对温度测量的影响。
将复合树脂样本（n = 5）（Filtek Supreme Ultra、Filtek LS和EsthetX HD）放置在三种基底（铝、聚甲醛和牙齿）内的热电偶尖端上。使用三种固化灯（Elipar 2500 QTH、SmartLite Max LED、DemiUltra LED）在距离1 mm处对复合树脂进行光固化。辐照度分别为798、980和1135 mW/cm²。通过从聚合温度曲线中减去固化后温度来确定放热情况。采用方差分析和Student-Newman-Keuls事后检验分析峰值温度和放热情况之间的差异（显著性水平0.05）。
对于所有测试的复合树脂，与DemiUltra LED和QTH相比，SmartLite LED固化灯导致更高的峰值温度和放热情况（16.9 - 20.4°C 对比 12.3 - 14.7°C 对比 8.9 - 9.7°C）。因此，发光二极管产生的温度升高比石英卤钨灯高，且辐照度较低的发光二极管比辐照度较高的发光二极管导致更高的温度升高。基于硅氧烷的Filtek LS产生的放热情况明显高于基于甲基丙烯酸酯的EsthetX HD和Filtek Supreme Ultra（6.2 - 7.6°C 对比 3.6 - 4.5°C 对比 2.7 - 3.6°C）。基底对温度有显著影响。在聚甲醛基底中发现的温度曲线与牙齿基底相当，而铝基底使温度降低10 - 20度。
修复性复合树脂的固化由于照射和放热反应会使修复体下方的温度升高；温度升高的幅度取决于固化灯设计、复合树脂类型和周围基底。基于硅氧烷的Filtek LS产生的放热情况明显高于基于甲基丙烯酸酯的EsthetX HD和Filtek Supreme Ultra。
