Vol 21 No. 1

J Bagh College Dentistry Vol. 21(1), 2009 Depth of cure evaluation…..
Table 3: Mean depth of cure in mm and standard
deviation of the four different light-activated
composites cured with the nine-different
curing modes.
Depth of cure in mm
Curing
Mode
Tetric
Ceram
Helio
molar
Herculite
XRV
Degufill
Mineral
Control
2.36 1.75 2.87
(0.01) (0.02) (0.05)
1.95 (0.03)
PDI
2.29 1.72 2.86 1.975
(0.04) (0.04) (0.02) (0.03)
PDII
2.46
2.85
1.9 (0.04)
(0.02)
(0.04)
2.01 (0.04)
SS
2.39 1.84 2.98
(0.05) (0.06) (0.04)
2.11 (0.05)
PCI
2.34 1.83 2.89
(0.03) (0.06) (0.05)
1.98 (0.06)
PCII
2.37 1.81 2.89
(0.04) (0.06) (0.05)
2.06 (0.03)
PLPC
2.47 1.87
(0.05) (0.04)
3.2 (0.05) 1.95 (0.04)
PMPC
2.52
3.25
1.9 (0.03)
(0.03)
(0.05)
2.08 (0.04)
RHCC
2.28 1.77 3.21
(0.03) (0.03) (0.07)
1.9 (0.06)
Standard deviation in parentheses.
DISCUSSION
In this study, although both curing mode and
composite type significantly affect depth of cure but
Figure 4 demonstrated that, the effect of composite
composition on the depth of cure is much more than
that of curing mode and this is due to the fact that, the
most important factors affecting the polymerization
depth are the composition and the physical
properties of the composite resins and not the
energy density and this finding is in agreement
with DeBacker & Dermaut (8) . Herculite XRV
light-activated composite exhibited the highest
depth of cure values for all the nine curing modes
(Figure 2) followed by Tetric Ceram, Degufill
Mineral, and Heliomolar, which exhibited the
lowest depth of cure values. Depth of cure of light
activated resin-based composites is a function of
the material’s filler composition and resin
chemistry, its shade and translucency, the intensity
of the light source, and the length of the radiation
exposure (9) . The data of this study indicated that,
microhybrid resin-based composite had the
greatest depth of cure because of their high filler
loading (79% by weight) and relatively large
Depth of cure in mm
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
Tetric Heliomolar Herculite Degufill
Composite type
Control
PDI
PDII
SS
PCI
PCII
PLPC
PMPC
RHCC
Figure 2: Mean depth of cure in mm of the
four different light-activated composites cured
with the nine-different curing modes
according to the composite type.
Table 4: LSD-test of the depth of cure
according to the composite type.
TetricTetric Tetric Helio Helio
molar molar
Herculite
Helio
HerculiteDegufillHerculite Degufill Degufill
molar
C *** *** *** *** *** ***
PDI *** *** *** *** *** ***
PDII *** *** *** *** *** ***
SS *** *** *** *** *** ***
PCI *** *** *** *** *** ***
PCII *** *** *** *** *** ***
PLPC*** *** *** *** ** ***
PMPC*** *** *** *** *** ***
RHCC*** *** *** *** *** ***
** : Highly significant difference
*** : Very highly significant difference
average particle size (0.6-0.7 micron) while for the
microfills (66.7% by weight) for the filler loading
and (0.04 micron) for the average particle size and
in this study, Herculite XRV and Tetric Ceram
composites are micro-hybrids and both of them
exhibited high depth of cure values in comparison
with Heliomolar composite which is a microfilled
composite and this finding is in agreement with the
findings of Jain & Pershing (10) . The findings of this
study, is not in agreement with the findings of Jain
& Pershing (10) in that, greater irradiance (energy
density) or longer exposure times are needed to cure
small particle resin-based composites in an attempt
to increase their depth of cure because in this study,
the experimental curing modes of high energy
density did not greatly increase the depth of cure
especially with Heliomolar microfilled lightactivated
composite (Figure 2).
Restorative Dentistry 7