RESEARCH ARTICLE


Temperature Rise Within the Pulp Chamber During Composite Resin Polymerisation Using Three Different Light Sources



A Santini*, C Watterson, V Miletic
Edinburgh Postgraduate Dental Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Lauriston Place, Edinburgh, EH3 9HA. UK


Article Metrics

CrossRef Citations:
0
Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 1573
Abstract HTML Views: 1225
PDF Downloads: 349
Total Views/Downloads: 3147
Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 899
Abstract HTML Views: 734
PDF Downloads: 225
Total Views/Downloads: 1858



Creative Commons License
© Santini et al.; Licensee Bentham Open.

open-access license: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the work is properly cited.

* Address correspondence to this author at the Edinburgh Postgraduate Dental Institute, The University of Edinburgh, Lauriston Place, Edinburgh, EH3 9HA. UK; Tel: 0131 536 4970; Fax: 0131 536 4971; E-mail: ariosantini@hotmail.com


Abstract

The purpose of the study was to compare temperature rise during polymerisation of resin based composites

(RBCs) with two LED light curing units (LCUs) compared to a halogen control light.

Methods:

Forty-five extracted molars, patients aging 11-18 years were used. Thermocouples (TCs) were placed in contact with the roof of the pulp chamber using a ‘split-tooth’ method. Teeth were placed in a water bath with the temperature of the pulp chamber regulated at 37°±1°C.

Group 1 (control):

Prismatics® Lite II (Dentsply Detrey, Konstanz, Germany), a halogen LCU, light intensity 500 mW/cm2.

Group 2:

Bluephase® ( Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), light intensity 1100 mW/cm2. Group 3:Elipar Freelight2 (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany), light intensity 1000 mW/cm2. Temperature changes were continuously recorded with a data logger connected to a PC.

Results:

Significantly higher temperature rise was recorded during bond curing than RBC curing in all 3 groups. (Halogen; p =0.0003: Bluephase; p=0.0043: Elipar; p=0.0002.). Higher temperatures were recorded during polymerisation of both Bond and RBC with both LED sources than with the halogen control. There was no significant difference between the two LED,LCUs (Bond:p=0.0279: RBC p=0.0562: Mann-Whitney).

Conclusion:

The potential risk of pulpal injury during RBC polymerisation is increased when using light-curing units with high energy output compared to low energy output light sources. The rise is greatest when curing bonding agent alone and clinicians are advised to be aware of the potential hazard of thermal trauma to the pulp when using high intensity light sources. However the mean temperature rise with all three units was below the limits normally associated with permanent pulp damage.

Key Words: Light curing units, resin based composites, pulp temperature rise.