RESUMO

This study compared the compressive strength of a composite resin and compomer photoactivated with a conventional quartz-tungsten halogen-light (XL 3000, 3M/SPE) and a blue light-emitting diode (LED) (SmartLite PS; Dentsply/De Trey). Forty disc-shaped specimens were prepared using a split polytetrafluoroethylene matrix (4.0 mm diameter x 8.0 mm hight) in which the materials were inserted incrementally. The curing time of each increment was of 40 s with the QTH and 10 s with the LED. The specimens were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=10), according to the light source and the restorative material. After storage in distilled water at 37 degrees C +/- 2 degrees C for 24 h, the specimens was tested in compressive strength in a universal testing machine with load cell of 500 kgf running at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data (in MPa) were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls test (p<0.05). For the composite resin, light curing with the QTH source did not produce statistically significant difference (p>0.05) in the compressive strength when compared to light curing with the LED source. However, light curing of the compomer with the QTH source resulted in significantly higher compressive strength than the use of the LED unit (p>0.05). The composite resin presented significantly higher (p>0.05) compressive strength than the compomer, regardless of the light source. In conclusion, the compressive strength of the tested materials photoactivated with a QTH and a LED light source was influenced by the energy density employed and the chemical composition of the esthetic restorative materials.

Assuntos

RESUMO

This study compared the compressive strength of a composite resin and compomer photoactivated with a conventional quartz-tungsten halogen-light (XL 3000, 3M/SPE) and a blue light-emitting diode (LED) (SmartLite PS; Dentsply/De Trey). Forty disc-shaped specimens were prepared using a split polytetrafluoroethylene matrix (4.0 mm diameter x 8.0 mm hight) in which the materials were inserted incrementally. The curing time of each increment was of 40 s with the QTH and 10 s with the LED. The specimens were randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=10), according to the light source and the restorative material. After storage in distilled water at 37oC ± 2oC for 24 h, the specimens was tested in compressive strength in a universal testing machine with load cell of 500 kgf running at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data (in MPa) were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls test (p<0.05). For the composite resin, light curing with the QTH source did not produce statistically significant difference (p>0.05) in the compressive strength when compared to light curing with the LED source. However, light curing of the compomer with the QTH source resulted in significantly higher compressive strength than the use of the LED unit (p>0.05). The composite resin presented significantly higher (p>0.05) compressive strength than the compomer, regardless of the light source. In conclusion, the compressive strength of the tested materials photoactivated with a QTH and a LED light source was influenced by the energy density employed and the chemical composition of the esthetic restorative materials.

Este estudo comparou a resistência à compressão de uma resina composta e de um compômero, fotoativados com luz halógena convencional de quarto-tungstênio (QTH) (XL 300, 3M/SPE) e LED azul (SmartLite PS; Dentsply/De Trey). Foram confeccionados 40 espécimes em forma de disco usando uma matriz bipartida de politetrafluoretileno (4,0 mm de diâmetro x 8,0 mm de altura) em que o material foi inserido incrementalmente. O tempo de polimerização de cada incremento foi de 40 s para a luz halógena convencional e de 10 s para o LED. Os espécimes foram aleatoriamente alocados em 4 grupos (n=10), de acordo com a fonte de luz e com o material restaurador. Depois de armazenadas em água destilada a 37°C ± 2°C por 24 h, a resistência à compressão dos espécimes foi testada em uma máquina universal de ensaios com célula de carga de 500 kgf a uma velocidade de carregamento de 0,5 mm/min. Os dados (em MPa) foram analisados estatisticamente por ANOVA e teste de Student-Newman-Keuls (p<0,05). Para a resina composta, a fotopolimerização com luz halógena não produziu diferença estatisticamente significante (p>0,05) em sua resistência à compressão quando comparada à fotopolimerização com LED. Contudo, a fotopolimerização do compômero com a luz halógena resultou em uma resistência à compressão significativamente maior que a feita o LED (p>0,05). A resina composta apresentou resistência à compressão significativamente maior que a do compômero, independente da fonte de luz. Concluiu-se que a resistência à compressão dos materiais fotopolimerizados com luz halógena e LED foi influenciada pela densidade de energia empregada e pela composição química dos materiais restauradores estéticos.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The use of multi-component femoral implants to replace the femur head and re-establish bone motion has been widespread since the 70s. Frequently these implants have spherical metallic heads made of, for example, 316-L stainless steel or Cr-Co alloys, which allow rotational motion towards a polymeric component (UHMWPE). One of the major causes of implant rejection is the generation of UHMWPE debris on the surface between the implant head and the polymeric component. The gamma ray sterilization of implants and the periodical X-ray medical control could contribute to premature degradation of the polymeric surface, resulting in increased wear and shortened lifetime of the implant. In this work we study the degradation degree of the polymeric UHMWPE component as function of the X-ray dose. The elasto-plastic deformation and recovery were carried out by means of a nanohardness tester equipment and the polymer degradation was measured using a fast Fourier transform infra-red (FT-IR) equipment. The results show the compromise among the irradiation doses, the surface oxidation and the mechanical properties of the samples.

Assuntos