Abrasion resistance of composites polymerized by light-emitting diodes (LED) and halogen light-curing units

This study compared the abrasion resistance of direct composite resins cured by light-emitting diodes (LED) and halogen light-curing units. Twenty specimens (12 mm in diameter; 1.0 mm thick) of each composite resin [TPH (Dentsply); Definite (Degussa); Charisma (Heraus Kulzer)] were prepared using a polytetrafluoroethylene matrix. Ten specimens per material were cured with the LED source and 10 with the halogen lamp for 40 s. The resin discs were polished, submitted to initial surface roughness reading (Ra initial - mum) in a roughness tester and stored in water at 37°C for 15 days. The specimens were weighed (M1) and submitted to simulated toothbrushing using slurry of water and dentifrice with high abrasiveness. After 100 minutes in the toothbrushing simulator, the specimens were cleaned, submitted to a new surface roughness reading (Ra final - mum) and reweighed (M2). Mass loss was determined as the difference between M1 and M2. Data were recorded and analyzed statistically by one-way ANOVA and Tukey Test at 5% significance level. The composite resin with greater size of inorganic fillers (TPH) showed the lowest mass loss and surface roughness means, indicating a higher resistance to toothbrush abrasion (p<0.05). Definite cured with LED presented the least resistance to toothbrush abrasion, showing the highest means of surface roughness and mass loss (p<0.05). The LED source did not show the same effectiveness as the halogen lamp for polymerizing this specific composite resin. When the composite resins were cured a halogen LCU, no statistically significant difference was observed among the materials (p>0.05). It may be concluded that the type of light-curing unit and the resin composition seemed to interfere with the materials' resistance to abrasion