nach oben

Erschienen in:

28.10.2017 | Original Article

Clinical long-term success of contemporary nano-filled resin composites in class I and II restorations cured by LED or halogen light

verfasst von: Torsten Pflaum, Stefan Kranz, Regina Montag, Arndt Güntsch, Andrea Völpel, Robin Mills, Klaus Jandt, Bernd Sigusch

Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Ausgabe 4/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

The use of LED light-curing units (LED LCUs) for polymerising resin-based composite restorations has become widespread throughout dentistry. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of clinical longitudinal studies that evaluate the comparative efficacy of LED-based polymerisation in direct posterior composite restorations. The aim of the present study was to investigate the performance of class I and II resin composite restorations for two successful composite restorative materials cured with LED versus halogen LCUs.

Methods

One hundred restorations were placed using the nano-filled composites Grandio® or Filtek™ Supremé. The following test groups were established: LED-Grandio® n = 23 (LG), LED-Filtek™ Supremé n = 21 (LS). As controls were used: Halogen-Grandio® n = 28 (HG), Halogen-Filtek™ Supremé n = 28 (HS). All restorations were evaluated according to the clinical criteria of the CPM index (C-criteria) at baseline and after 6, 12 and 36 months.

Results

After 12 and 36 months, there were no significant differences between restorations polymerised with LED or halogen light. At the end of the study, 97% of the restorations showed sufficient results regardless of the employed LCU or composite. Globally, after 36 months, 56% of all restorations were assessed with code 0 (excellent) and 41% with code 1 (acceptable). In detail, excellent results (code 0) among the criteria surface quality; marginal integrity and marginal discoloration were assigned in 72, 70 and 69%.

Conclusions

For the current limitations in the clinical trial design, the results showed that LED-polymerisation is appropriate to ensure clinical success of direct posterior resin composite restorations in a range of 3 years.

Clinical significance

The choice of LCU has no significant influence on the clinical performance of posterior direct resin composite restorations within 3 years of wear.

da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Cenci MS, Donassollo TA, Loguercio AD, Demarco FF (2006) A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings. J Dent 34(7):427–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2005.09.006 CrossRefPubMed

Frankenberger R, Reinelt C, Kramer N (2014) Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities: 8-year results. Clin Oral Investig 18(1):125–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0957-8 CrossRefPubMed

Palaniappan S, Elsen L, Lijnen I, Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P (2010) Three-year randomised clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance, quantitative and qualitative wear patterns of hybrid composite restorations. Clin Oral Investig 14(4):441–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-009-0313-1 CrossRefPubMed

Demarco FF, Correa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJ (2012) Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater: Off Publ Acad Dent Mater 28(1):87–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.003 CrossRef

Lazaridou D, Belli R, Petschelt A, Lohbauer U (2014) Are resin composites suitable replacements for amalgam? A study of two-body wear. Clin Oral Investig. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1373-4

Lempel E, Toth A, Fabian T, Krajczar K, Szalma J (2015) Retrospective evaluation of posterior direct composite restorations: 10-year findings. Dent Mater: Off Publ Acad Dent Mater 31(2):115–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.11.001 CrossRef

Astvaldsdottir A, Dagerhamn J, Dijken JW, Naimi-Akbar A, Sandborgh-Englund G, Tranaeus S, Nilsson M (2015) Longevity of posterior resin composite restorations in adults - a systematic review. J Dent. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.05.001

Heintze SD, Rousson V (2012) Clinical effectiveness of direct class II restorations - a meta-analysis. J Adhes Dent 14(5):407–431. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a28390 PubMed

Opdam NJ, van de Sande FH, Bronkhorst E, Cenci MS, Bottenberg P, Pallesen U, Gaengler P, Lindberg A, Huysmans MC, van Dijken JW (2014) Longevity of posterior composite restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res 93(10):943–949. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034514544217 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Jandt KD, Mills RW (2013) A brief history of LED photopolymerization. Dent Mater 29(6):605–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2013.02.003 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Rueggeberg FA (2011) State-of-the-art: dental photocuring--a review. Dent Mater 27(1):39–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.021 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Mills RW, Jandt KD, Ashworth SH (1999) Dental composite depth of cure with halogen and blue light emitting diode technology. Br Dent J 186(8):388–391PubMed

13.

Jadhav S, Hegde V, Aher G, Fajandar N (2011) Influence of light curing units on failure of directcomposite restorations. J Conserv Dent 14(3):225–227. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972–0707.85793 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Mills RW, Uhl A, Blackwell GB, Jandt KD (2002) High power light emitting diode (LED) arrays versus halogen light polymerisation of oral biomaterials: Barcol hardness, compressive strength and radiometric properties. Biomaterials 23(14):2955–2963CrossRefPubMed

15.

Polydorou O, Manolakis A, Hellwig E, Hahn P (2008) Evaluation of the curing depth of two translucent composite materials using a halogen and two LED curing units. Clin Oral Investig 12(1):45–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-007-0142-z CrossRefPubMed

16.

Rencz A, Hickel R, Ilie N (2012) Curing efficiency of modern LED units. Clin Oral Investig 16(1):173–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0498-3 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Sigusch BW, Pflaum T, Volpel A, Schinkel M, Jandt KD (2009) The influence of various light curing units on the cytotoxicity of dental adhesives. Dent Mater 25(11):1446–1452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.06.016 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Stahl F, Ashworth SH, Jandt KD, Mills RW (2000) Light-emitting diode (LED) polymerisation of dental composites: flexural properties and polymerisation potential. Biomaterials 21(13):1379–1385CrossRefPubMed

19.

Price R (2013) Guest Editorial: Symposium on light sources in dentistry. Dent Mater 29(2):137–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.11.011 CrossRefPubMed

20.

El-Mowafy O, El-Badrawy W, Wasef M, Omar H, Kermanshahi S (2007) Efficacy of new LED light-curing units in hardening of Class II composite restorations. J Can Dent Assoc 73(3):253PubMed

21.

Jandt KD, Mills RW, Blackwell GB, Ashworth SH (2000) Depth of cure and compressive strength of dental composites cured with blue light emitting diodes (LEDs). Dent Mater 16(1):41–47CrossRefPubMed

22.

Malhotra N, Mala K (2010) Light-curing considerations for resin-based composite materials: a review. Part I. Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry 31 (7):498–505; quiz 506, 508.

23.

Mills RW, Uhl A, Jandt KD (2002) Optical power outputs, spectra and dental composite depths of cure, obtained with blue light emitting diode (LED) and halogen light curing units (LCUs). Br Dent J 193(8):459–463 discussion 455CrossRefPubMed

24.

Owens BM (2006) Evaluation of curing performance of light-emitting polymerisation units. Eur J Gen Dent 54(1):17–20

25.

Uhl A, Sigusch BW, Jandt KD (2004) Second generation LEDs for the polymerisation of oral biomaterials. Dent Mater 20(1):80–87CrossRefPubMed

26.

Wiggins KM, Hartung M, Althoff O, Wastian C, Mitra SB (2004) Curing performance of a new-generation light-emitting diode dental curing unit. J Am Dent Assoc 135(10):1471–1479CrossRefPubMed

27.

Santini A, Miletic V, Swift MD, Bradley M (2012) Degree of conversion and microhardness of TPO-containing resin-based composites cured by polywave and monowave LED units. J Dent 40(7):577–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.03.007 CrossRefPubMed

28.

Sigusch BW, Pflaum T, Volpel A, Gretsch K, Hoy S, Watts DC, Jandt KD (2012) Resin-composite cytotoxicity varies with shade and irradiance. Dent Mater 28(3):312–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.12.007 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Sigusch BW, Volpel A, Braun I, Uhl A, Jandt KD (2007) Influence of different light curing units on the cytotoxicity of various dental composites. Dent Mater 23(11):1342–1348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.11.013 CrossRefPubMed

30.

Gaengler P, Hoyer I, Montag R (2001) Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: the 10-year report. J Adhes Dent 3(2):185–194PubMed

31.

Rezwani-Kaminski T, Kamann W, Gaengler P (2002) Secondary caries susceptibility of teeth with long-term performing composite restorations. J Oral Rehabil 29(12):1131–1138CrossRefPubMed

32.

Cvar JF, Ryge G (2005) Reprint of criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. 1971. Clin Oral Investig 9(4):215–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-005-0018-z CrossRefPubMed

33.

Ernst CP, Brandenbusch M, Meyer G, Canbek K, Gottschalk F, Willershausen B (2006) Two-year clinical performance of a nanofiller vs a fine-particle hybrid resin composite. Clin Oral Investig 10(2):119–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-006-0041-8 CrossRefPubMed

34.

Lynch CD, Opdam NJ, Hickel R, Brunton PA, Gurgan S, Kakaboura A, Shearer AC, Vanherle G, Wilson NH (2014) Guidance on posterior resin composites: Academy of Operative Dentistry - European Section. J Dent 42(4):377–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.01.009 CrossRefPubMed

35.

Uhl A, Mills RW, Jandt KD (2003) Photoinitiator dependent composite depth of cure and Knoop hardness with halogen and LED light curing units. Biomaterials 24(10):1787–1795CrossRefPubMed

36.

Barabanti N, Gagliani M, Roulet JF, Testori T, Ozcan M, Cerutti A (2013) Marginal quality of posterior microhybrid resin composite restorations applied using two polymerisation protocols: 5-year randomised split mouth trial. J Dent 41(5):436–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.02.009 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Attar N, Korkmaz Y (2007) Effect of two light-emitting diode (LED) and one halogen curing light on the microleakage of Class V flowable composite restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 8(2):80–88PubMed

38.

Campregher UB, Samuel SM, Fortes CB, Medina AD, Collares FM, Ogliari FA (2007) Effectiveness of second-generation light-emitting diode (LED) light curing units. J Contemp Dent Pract 8(2):35–42PubMed

39.

Yaman BC, Efes BG, Dorter C, Gomec Y, Erdilek D, Buyukgokcesu S (2011) The effects of halogen and light-emitting diode light curing on the depth of cure and surface microhardness of composite resins. J Conserv Dent 14(2):136–139. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972–0707.82613 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Choudhary S, Suprabha B (2013) Effectiveness of light emitting diode and halogen light curing units for curing microhybrid and nanocomposites. J Conserv Dent 16(3):233–237. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972–0707.111322 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Yazici AR, Celik C, Ozgunaltay G, Dayangac B (2010) The effects of different light-curing units on the clinical performance of nanofilled composite resin restorations in non-carious cervical lesions: 3-year follow-up. J Adhes Dent 12(3):231–236. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a17536 PubMed

42.

Koupis NS, Eliades T, Athanasiou AE (2008) Clinical evaluation of bracket bonding using two different polymerisation sources. The Angle Orthodontist 78(5):922–925. https://doi.org/10.2319/072807–351.1 CrossRefPubMed

43.

Krishnaswamy NR, Sunitha C (2007) Light-emitting diode vs halogen light curing of orthodontic brackets: a 15-month clinical study of bond failures. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 132(4):518–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.09.038 CrossRef

44.

Mirabella D, Spena R, Scognamiglio G, Luca L, Gracco A, Siciliani G (2008) LED vs halogen light-curing of adhesive-precoated brackets. The Angle Orthodontist 78(5):935–940. https://doi.org/10.2319/042707–211.1 CrossRefPubMed

45.

Filipov IA, Vladimirov SB (2006) Residual monomer in a composite resin after light-curing with different sources, light intensities and spectra of radiation. Braz Dent J 17(1):34–38CrossRefPubMed

46.

Uhl A, Volpel A, Sigusch BW (2006) Influence of heat from light curing units and dental composite polymerisation on cells in vitro. J Dent 34(4):298–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2005.07.004 CrossRefPubMed

47.

Uhl A, Michaelis C, Mills RW, Jandt KD (2004) The influence of storage and indenter load on the Knoop hardness of dental composites polymerised with LED and halogen technologies. Dent Mater: Off Publ Acad Dent Mater 20(1):21–28CrossRef

48.

Uhl A, Mills RW, Rzanny AE, Jandt KD (2005) Time dependence of composite shrinkage using halogen and LED light curing. Dent Mater: Off Publ Acad Dent Mater 21(3):278–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.03.010 CrossRef

49.

Al Shaafi M, Maawadh A, Al Qahtani M (2011) Evaluation of light intensity output of QTH and LED curing devices in various governmental health institutions. Oper Dent 36(4):356–361. https://doi.org/10.2341/10–247-o CrossRefPubMed

50.

Hervas-Garcia A, Martinez-Lozano MA, Cabanes-Vila J, Barjau-Escribano A, Fos-Galve P (2006) Composite resins. A review of the materials and clinical indications. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 11(2):E215–E220PubMed

51.

Kiremitci A, Alpaslan T, Gurgan S (2009) Six-year clinical evaluation of packable composite restorations. Oper Dent 34(1):11–17. https://doi.org/10.2341/08–48 CrossRefPubMed

52.

Laegreid T, Gjerdet NR, Johansson AK (2012) Extensive composite molar restorations: 3 years clinical evaluation. Acta Odontol Scand 70(4):344–352. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2011.603355 CrossRefPubMed

53.

Schirrmeister JF, Huber K, Hellwig E, Hahn P (2009) Four-year evaluation of a resin composite including nanofillers in posterior cavities. J Adhes Dent 11(5):399–404PubMed

54.

Kramer N, Garcia-Godoy F, Frankenberger R (2005) Evaluation of resin composite materials. Part II: in vivo investigations. Am J Dent 18(2):75–81PubMed

55.

Cavalcante LM, Masouras K, Watts DC, Pimenta LA, Silikas N (2009) Effect of nanofillers’ size on surface properties after toothbrush abrasion. Am J Dent 22(1):60–64PubMed

56.

Heintze SD, Forjanic M, Ohmiti K, Rousson V (2010) Surface deterioration of dental materials after simulated toothbrushing in relation to brushing time and load. Dent Mater 26(4):306–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.152 CrossRefPubMed

57.

Janus J, Fauxpoint G, Arntz Y, Pelletier H, Etienne O (2010) Surface roughness and morphology of three nanocomposites after two different polishing treatments by a multitechnique approach. Dent Mater 26(5):416–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.09.014 CrossRefPubMed

58.

Dietz W, Montag R, Kraft U, Walther M, Sigusch BW, Gaengler P (2014) Longitudinal micromorphological 15-year results of posterior composite restorations using three-dimensional scanning electron microscopy. J Dent 42(8):959–969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.04.013 CrossRefPubMed

59.

Celik C, Arhun N, Yamanel K (2014) Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: a 3-year study. Med Princ Pract 23(5):453–459. https://doi.org/10.1159/000364874 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Palaniappan S, Bharadwaj D, Mattar DL, Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P (2011) Nanofilled and microhybrid composite restorations: Five-year clinical wear performances. Dent Mater 27(7):692–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.03.012 CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Clinical long-term success of contemporary nano-filled resin composites in class I and II restorations cured by LED or halogen light
verfasst von: Torsten Pflaum
Stefan Kranz
Regina Montag
Arndt Güntsch
Andrea Völpel
Robin Mills
Klaus Jandt
Bernd Sigusch
Publikationsdatum: 28.10.2017
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Ausgabe 4/2018
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2226-8

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

19.04.2024 | Vorhofflimmern | Nachrichten

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Clinical long-term success of contemporary nano-filled resin composites in class I and II restorations cured by LED or halogen light

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical significance

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical significance

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2018

Clinical survival of chair-side generated monolithic lithium disilicate crowns:10-year results

X-ray diffraction analysis of MTA mixed and placed with various techniques

Oral cancer radiotherapy affects enamel microhardness and associated indentation pattern morphology

Global oral health status of athletes with intellectual disabilities

Influence of different types of light on the response of the pulp tissue in dental bleaching: a systematic review

Evaluation of the interface between gutta-percha and two types of sealers using scanning electron microscopy (SEM)

Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Invasive Zahnbehandlung: Wann eine Antibiotikaprophylaxe vor infektiöser Endokarditis schützt

Zell-Organisatoren unter Druck: Mechanismen des embryonalen Zahnwachstums aufgedeckt

Die Oralprophylaxe & Kinderzahnheilkunde umbenannt

Newsletter