Influence of different light curing units on the cytotoxicity of various dental composites
- PMID: 17229462
- DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2006.11.013
Influence of different light curing units on the cytotoxicity of various dental composites
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the dependence of the toxicity of various dental composites on the use of high- and low-power light curing units (LCUs).
Methods: The composites Filtek Z 250, Durafill VS, Solitaire 2 and Grandio were polymerized using different light densities from three LCUs, namely Heliolux II, Swiss Master Light (SML) and a prototype LED. The toxicity of polymerized samples was tested by exposing them to the cell culture medium up to 28 days. The extracts of the composites were collected daily and used for incubation in human gingival fibroblasts cultures.
Results: Slow, low-intensity curing using the LED or the Heliolux II showed similar characteristics for all four composites, regarding the cell viability rate of human gingival fibroblasts. After 1 day of storage suboptimal results could be observed for the SML/Durafill and optimal results for SML/Grandio combination (approximately 100% cell viability). In addition, the composite Solitaire the SML yielded significantly better results than the other LCUs (cell viability, p < or = 0.001: SML 60.5%, Heliolux 44.5%, LED 44.2%). Furthermore, the combination of the SML with Z 250 composite showed, after the first day and up to day 28, statistically significantly higher cell viability rates than the combination with the LED or Heliolux II.
Significance: This study shows that the combination of a high power LCU with some composites positively influences the HGF cell viability effected by the investigated composite extracts. Moreover, there is further indication that a reduction of composite toxicity is possible if the curing mode is adapted to the used composite.
Similar articles
-
Resin-composite cytotoxicity varies with shade and irradiance.Dent Mater. 2012 Mar;28(3):312-9. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.12.007. Epub 2012 Jan 10. Dent Mater. 2012. PMID: 22240279
-
Influence of heat from light curing units and dental composite polymerization on cells in vitro.J Dent. 2006 Apr;34(4):298-306. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.07.004. Epub 2005 Sep 19. J Dent. 2006. PMID: 16171922
-
The influence of various light curing units on the cytotoxicity of dental adhesives.Dent Mater. 2009 Nov;25(11):1446-52. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.06.016. Epub 2009 Jul 31. Dent Mater. 2009. PMID: 19647309
-
Advances in light curing units and curing techniques: a literature review.SADJ. 2005 Nov;60(10):451-4. SADJ. 2005. PMID: 16438362 Review.
-
Light curing of resin-based composites in the LED era.Am J Dent. 2008 Jun;21(3):135-42. Am J Dent. 2008. PMID: 18686762 Review.
Cited by
-
Residual HEMA and TEGDMA release and cytotoxicity evaluation of resin-modified glass ionomer cement and compomers cured with different light sources.ScientificWorldJournal. 2014 Jan 28;2014:218295. doi: 10.1155/2014/218295. eCollection 2014. ScientificWorldJournal. 2014. PMID: 24592149 Free PMC article.
-
Influence of Layer Thickness and Shade on the Transmission of Light through Contemporary Resin Composites.Materials (Basel). 2024 Mar 28;17(7):1554. doi: 10.3390/ma17071554. Materials (Basel). 2024. PMID: 38612069 Free PMC article.
-
Reaction of rat subcutaneous connective tissue to resin composites polymerized with different light curing units and different lightening methods.Int J Dent. 2012;2012:156352. doi: 10.1155/2012/156352. Epub 2012 Jun 14. Int J Dent. 2012. PMID: 22761617 Free PMC article.
-
Cytotoxicity of Light-Cured Dental Materials according to Different Sample Preparation Methods.Materials (Basel). 2017 Mar 14;10(3):288. doi: 10.3390/ma10030288. Materials (Basel). 2017. PMID: 28772647 Free PMC article.
-
The effects of bluephase LED light on fibroblasts.Eur J Dent. 2012 Jul;6(3):311-7. Eur J Dent. 2012. PMID: 22904660 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources