• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제27권6호
• /
• pp.561-568
• /
• 2002

Purpose of this research is estimating polymerization depth of different source of light. XL 3000 for halo-gen light, Apollo 95E for plasma arc light and Easy cure for LED light source were used in this study. Different shade (B1 & A3) resin composites (Esthet-X, Dentsply, U.S.A.) were used to measure depth of cure. 1, 2, and 3 mm thick samples were light cured for three seconds, six seconds or 10 seconds with Apollo 95E and they were light cured with XL-3000 and Easy cure for 10 seconds, 20 seconds, or 40 seconds. Vicker's hardness test carried out after store samples for 24 hours in distilled water. Results were as following. 1. Curing time increases from al1 source of lights, oui$.$ing depth increased(p<0.05). 2. Depth (that except 1mm group and 2mm group which lighten to halogen source of light) deepens in all groups, Vickers hardness decreased(p<0.05). 3. Vicker's hardness of A3 shade composite was lower in all depths more than B1 shade composites in group that do polymerization for 10 seconds and 20 seconds using halogen source of light(p<0.05), but group that do polymerization lot 40 seconds did not show difference(p>0.05). 4. Groups that do polymerization using Plasma arc and LED source of light did not show Vicker's hardness difference according to color at surface and 1mm depth(p>0.05), but showed difference according to color at 2mm and 3mm depth(p<0.05). The results showed that Apollo 95E need more polymerization times than manufacturer's recommendation (3 seconds), and Easy cure need polymerization time of XL-3000 at least.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제27권1호
• /
• pp.34-43
• /
• 2002

The purpose of this study was to compare microleakage and marginal hybrid layer in class V restorations using two one-bottle adhesives and one self-etching adhesive. Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in dentin were pre-pared on buccal and lingual surfaces of 30 extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into three treatment groups (n=30) and restored with three adhesives and composites: Single Bond/Filtek Z-250 (Group 1), Prime&BondNT/Esthet.X (Group 2), UniFil Bond/UniFil F (Group 3). For microleakage, samples were stored in room temperature water for 24 hours, thermocycled stained with 2% methylene blue dye, sectioned into halves, scored and analysed using Mann-whitney test and Wilcoxon signed rank sum test. For marginal hybrid layer, samples were sectioned into halves, treated with 10% phosphoric acid for 5 seconds, stored in 5% NaOCL solution for 24 hours, dried and gold coated. Occlusal and gingival margins of each sample were inspected under SEM. The results of this study were as follows ; 1. Microleakage at the occlusal margins was not evident in group 1 and group 2, but it showed in group 3 (p<0.05). 2. Microleakage in group 1 and group 3 was significantly lower than in group 2 at gingival margins (p<0.05). 3. Microleakage at gingival margins was greater than at occlusal margins in group 1 and group 2, but microleakage at occlusal margins was greater than at gingival margins in group 3 (p<0.05). 4. In group 1 and group 2, no gaps at occlusal margins showed. But gaps showed in group 3. Occlusal margins were free from a hybrid layer in all groups 5. The thickness of the marginal hybrid layers was 2.5~5 $\mu\textrm{m}$ thick in group 5 $\mu\textrm{m}$ thick in group 2 and 1.5 $\mu\textrm{m}$ thick in group 3. 6 There was no corelation between microleakage and thickness of marginal hybrid layer. In coclusion, the effect of dentin adhesives on microleakge in class V composite restorations was excellent when one-bottle adhesives were applied on enamel margin, and it was good when a self-etching adhesive was applied on dentinal margin. There was no corelation between microleakage and thickness of marginal hybrid layer.