Does tack curing luting cements affect the final cure?

Daniel Stegall, Daranee Versluis, Jorge Perdigão, Antheunis Versluis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Short initial light curing or "tack curing" is used to create a semi-gel state in luting cements for easier excess material cleanup. The effect of tack curing on the final cure of luting cements was measured in terms of hardness. Materials and Methods: Three cement types were tested: two dual-curing composite cements (RelyX Unicem 2; Maxcem Elite); three light-curing veneer cements (Choice 2; Variolink Esthetic LC; RelyX Veneer); and two self-curing resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) luting cements (RelyX Luting Plus; Nexus RMGI). Cements were placed in 1.5 × 2 × 8 mm plaster slots covered with orange glass during curing and were cured from one end. Tack curing was performed for 2 to 5 s using an LED curing light, followed 2 min later by 10-40 s final light curing or self-curing, as per manufacturer instructions (n = 10). Control groups received only final light curing or self-curing. After 24 h storage (37°C, 100% humidity), Vickers hardness was measured in 0.5-mm depth increments. Results were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and pairwise comparisons (α = 0.05). Results: The hardness of dual-curing and light-curing cements significantly decreased with increasing depth (p = 0.0001). Tack curing of dual-curing and light-curing cements tended to increase hardness at all depths, except near the surface for light-curing veneer cements. Self-curing cements showed no hardness reduction with depth and no effect from tack curing. Conclusion: Although a slight surface hardness reduction may occur in light-curing veneer cements, the overall effect on three luting cement types was insignificant or resulted in only a slight increase in depth-of-cure.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)239-243
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Adhesive Dentistry
Volume19
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Hardness
Light
Glass Ionomer Cements
Humidity
Esthetics
Glass
Analysis of Variance
Gels
Control Groups

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthodontics
  • Oral Surgery
  • Periodontics

Cite this

Does tack curing luting cements affect the final cure? / Stegall, Daniel; Versluis, Daranee; Perdigão, Jorge; Versluis, Antheunis.

In: Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, Vol. 19, No. 3, 01.01.2017, p. 239-243.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d795b4d31c1f46eab913d7facad2bb80,
title = "Does tack curing luting cements affect the final cure?",
abstract = "Purpose: Short initial light curing or {"}tack curing{"} is used to create a semi-gel state in luting cements for easier excess material cleanup. The effect of tack curing on the final cure of luting cements was measured in terms of hardness. Materials and Methods: Three cement types were tested: two dual-curing composite cements (RelyX Unicem 2; Maxcem Elite); three light-curing veneer cements (Choice 2; Variolink Esthetic LC; RelyX Veneer); and two self-curing resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) luting cements (RelyX Luting Plus; Nexus RMGI). Cements were placed in 1.5 × 2 × 8 mm plaster slots covered with orange glass during curing and were cured from one end. Tack curing was performed for 2 to 5 s using an LED curing light, followed 2 min later by 10-40 s final light curing or self-curing, as per manufacturer instructions (n = 10). Control groups received only final light curing or self-curing. After 24 h storage (37°C, 100{\%} humidity), Vickers hardness was measured in 0.5-mm depth increments. Results were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and pairwise comparisons (α = 0.05). Results: The hardness of dual-curing and light-curing cements significantly decreased with increasing depth (p = 0.0001). Tack curing of dual-curing and light-curing cements tended to increase hardness at all depths, except near the surface for light-curing veneer cements. Self-curing cements showed no hardness reduction with depth and no effect from tack curing. Conclusion: Although a slight surface hardness reduction may occur in light-curing veneer cements, the overall effect on three luting cement types was insignificant or resulted in only a slight increase in depth-of-cure.",
author = "Daniel Stegall and Daranee Versluis and Jorge Perdig{\~a}o and Antheunis Versluis",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3290/j.jad.a38410",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "239--243",
journal = "Journal of Adhesive Dentistry",
issn = "1461-5185",
publisher = "Quintessence Publishing Company",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does tack curing luting cements affect the final cure?

AU - Stegall, Daniel

AU - Versluis, Daranee

AU - Perdigão, Jorge

AU - Versluis, Antheunis

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Purpose: Short initial light curing or "tack curing" is used to create a semi-gel state in luting cements for easier excess material cleanup. The effect of tack curing on the final cure of luting cements was measured in terms of hardness. Materials and Methods: Three cement types were tested: two dual-curing composite cements (RelyX Unicem 2; Maxcem Elite); three light-curing veneer cements (Choice 2; Variolink Esthetic LC; RelyX Veneer); and two self-curing resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) luting cements (RelyX Luting Plus; Nexus RMGI). Cements were placed in 1.5 × 2 × 8 mm plaster slots covered with orange glass during curing and were cured from one end. Tack curing was performed for 2 to 5 s using an LED curing light, followed 2 min later by 10-40 s final light curing or self-curing, as per manufacturer instructions (n = 10). Control groups received only final light curing or self-curing. After 24 h storage (37°C, 100% humidity), Vickers hardness was measured in 0.5-mm depth increments. Results were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and pairwise comparisons (α = 0.05). Results: The hardness of dual-curing and light-curing cements significantly decreased with increasing depth (p = 0.0001). Tack curing of dual-curing and light-curing cements tended to increase hardness at all depths, except near the surface for light-curing veneer cements. Self-curing cements showed no hardness reduction with depth and no effect from tack curing. Conclusion: Although a slight surface hardness reduction may occur in light-curing veneer cements, the overall effect on three luting cement types was insignificant or resulted in only a slight increase in depth-of-cure.

AB - Purpose: Short initial light curing or "tack curing" is used to create a semi-gel state in luting cements for easier excess material cleanup. The effect of tack curing on the final cure of luting cements was measured in terms of hardness. Materials and Methods: Three cement types were tested: two dual-curing composite cements (RelyX Unicem 2; Maxcem Elite); three light-curing veneer cements (Choice 2; Variolink Esthetic LC; RelyX Veneer); and two self-curing resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) luting cements (RelyX Luting Plus; Nexus RMGI). Cements were placed in 1.5 × 2 × 8 mm plaster slots covered with orange glass during curing and were cured from one end. Tack curing was performed for 2 to 5 s using an LED curing light, followed 2 min later by 10-40 s final light curing or self-curing, as per manufacturer instructions (n = 10). Control groups received only final light curing or self-curing. After 24 h storage (37°C, 100% humidity), Vickers hardness was measured in 0.5-mm depth increments. Results were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and pairwise comparisons (α = 0.05). Results: The hardness of dual-curing and light-curing cements significantly decreased with increasing depth (p = 0.0001). Tack curing of dual-curing and light-curing cements tended to increase hardness at all depths, except near the surface for light-curing veneer cements. Self-curing cements showed no hardness reduction with depth and no effect from tack curing. Conclusion: Although a slight surface hardness reduction may occur in light-curing veneer cements, the overall effect on three luting cement types was insignificant or resulted in only a slight increase in depth-of-cure.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021448145&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021448145&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3290/j.jad.a38410

DO - 10.3290/j.jad.a38410

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 239

EP - 243

JO - Journal of Adhesive Dentistry

JF - Journal of Adhesive Dentistry

SN - 1461-5185

IS - 3

ER -