Microhardness homogeneity of RBCs light-cured with a multiple-peak LED and surface characterization after wear.
Beatriz Ometto SahadiGabriel NimaCarolina Bosso AndreMaicon SeboldRegina Guenka Palma DibbJuliana Jendiroba FaraoniMarcelo GianniniPublished in: Brazilian dental journal (2021)
This in vitro study evaluated the effect of the beam homogeneity of a multiple-peak light-curing unit on the surface microhardness and the effect of toothbrushing wear on the microhardness, surface roughness, roughness profile, volume loss, and gloss retention of incremental and bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs). A LED light-curing unit (VALO) with four LEDs at the tip end (405, 445, 465A, and 465B nm emission peak) was used according to each manufacturer-recommended time to obtain disks (n=10) of six RBCs: Estelite Sigma Quick, Charisma Classic, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, Filtek Z250, Filtek Supreme Ultra, and Filtek Bulk Fill. Microhardness values were obtained according to each LED positioning of the light-curing unit on the top surface of the RBCs and were analyzed before and after toothbrushing regarding microhardness, surface roughness, roughness profile, volume loss, and gloss retention. Microhardness was considered homogeneous on the top surface regardless of the type of RBC or wavelength tested (p>0.05). Overall, toothbrushing did not reduce the microhardness of the RBCs but influenced the gloss values for most RBCs (p<0.001). Charisma Classic presented the greatest surface roughness and roughness profile after toothbrushing (p<0.05). Volume loss did not differ among RBCs (p>0.05). In conclusion, different wavelengths of the LED did not affect the top surface microhardness, regardless of the RBCs tested; and bulk-fill composites presented similar surface changes (microhardness, surface roughness, roughness profile, volume loss, and gloss retention) when compared to conventional composites after toothbrushing.