Thermography and conversion of fast-cure composite photocured with quad-wave and laser curing lights compared to a conventional curing light
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study investigated effects of the different emittance-mode protocols from three light curing units (LCUs): (i) a Laser (Monet); (ii) a quad-wave (PinkWave); (iii) a conventional LED (Elipar S10) on the temperature rise (ΔT) and degree of conversion (DC) when photo-curing fast or conventional bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBC). The aim was to correlate ΔT and DC, and the radiant exposure delivered to RBC specimens. A 3D-printed resin mold of 4 mm depth was filled with two bulk-fill RBCs: Tetric PowerFill® (fast photo-polymerised composite) (TPF) or Tetric EvoCeram® Bulk-Fill (EVO). Three LCUs were used: (i) Monet laser for 1 s and 3 s (MONET-1 s, MONET-3 s); (ii) PinkWave quad-wave used for 3 s in Boost mode (PW-3 s) and for 20 s in standard mode (PW-20 s); (iii) Elipar S10 for 5 s (S10–5 s) and for 20 s in standard mode (S10–20 s). 2-dimensional temperature maps were obtained before, during and for 60 s after the LCU had turned off using a thermal imaging camera. Thermal changes were analysed at five depths: (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 mm from the top surface of the RBC). The maximum temperature rise (Tmax) and the mean temperature rise (ΔT) were determined. Cylindrical-shaped specimens were prepared from each material using a stainless-steel split mold (4 × 4 mm) and light-cured with the same protocols. The DC was measured for 120 s and at 1 h after LCU had turned off using Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR). Data were analysed using Three-way ANOVA, One-way ANOVA, independent t-tests, and Tukey post-hoc tests (p < 0.05). Radiant exposures delivered by the various irradiation protocols were between 4.5–30.3 J/cm2. Short exposure times from MONET-1 s and PW-3 s delivered the lowest radiant exposures (4.5 and 5.2 J/cm2, respectively) and produced the lowest ΔT and DC. The longer exposure times in the standard modes of PW-20 s, S10–20 s, and MONET-3 s produced the highest Tmax, ΔT, and DC for both composites. The ΔT range among composites at different depths varied significantly (31.7–49.9 °C). DC of TPF ranged between 30–65% and in EVO between 15.3–56%. TPF had higher Tmax, ΔT for all depths and DC compared to EVO, across the LCU protocols (p < 0.05), except for PW-20 s and MONET-3 s. The coronal part of the restorations (1–2 mm) had the highest ΔT. There was a positive correlation between ΔT and DC at 4-mm depth after 120 s Longer, or standard, exposure times of the LCUs delivered greater radiant exposures and had higher DC and ΔT compared to shorter or high-irradiance protocols. The fast photo-polymerised RBC had comparatively superior thermal and conversion outcomes when it received a high irradiance for a short time (1–5 s) compared to the conventional Bulk-Fill RBC.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».