BACKGROUND: Light-emitting diode (LED) curing lights are becoming popular; however, questions about their efficiency remain. The authors performed a comprehensive analysis of the properties of resin-based composites cured with LED lights. METHODS: The authors evaluated seven LED lights and one quartz-tungsten-halogen light (control). They measured intensity, depth of cure (DOC), degree of conversion (DC), hardness and temperature rise. They used three shades of a hybrid resin-based composite and a microfill composite, as well as one shade of another hybrid composite. RESULTS: Two LED lights required additional cure time to reach a DOC similar to that of the control light. DC at the top of the samples was independent of the light used. At 2.0 millimeters, the DC for several LED lights was significantly lower than that for the control light and was correlated strongly to the light's intensity. The bottom-to-top ratio for hardness of resin-based composites cured by all but one light was greater than 0.80. All LED lights except one had smaller temperature rise than did the control light. CONCLUSIONS: Six of the seven LED curing lights performed similarly to a quartz-tungsten-halogen curing light in curing resin-based composites. Clinical Implications. While LED curing lights and a quartz-tungsten-halogen light could cure resin-based composites, some resin-based composites cured with LED lights may require additional curing time or smaller increments of thickness.
BACKGROUND: Light-emitting diode (LED) curing lights are becoming popular; however, questions about their efficiency remain. The authors performed a comprehensive analysis of the properties of resin-based composites cured with LED lights. METHODS: The authors evaluated seven LED lights and one quartz-tungsten-halogen light (control). They measured intensity, depth of cure (DOC), degree of conversion (DC), hardness and temperature rise. They used three shades of a hybrid resin-based composite and a microfill composite, as well as one shade of another hybrid composite. RESULTS: Two LED lights required additional cure time to reach a DOC similar to that of the control light. DC at the top of the samples was independent of the light used. At 2.0 millimeters, the DC for several LED lights was significantly lower than that for the control light and was correlated strongly to the light's intensity. The bottom-to-top ratio for hardness of resin-based composites cured by all but one light was greater than 0.80. All LED lights except one had smaller temperature rise than did the control light. CONCLUSIONS: Six of the seven LED curing lights performed similarly to a quartz-tungsten-halogen curing light in curing resin-based composites. Clinical Implications. While LED curing lights and a quartz-tungsten-halogen light could cure resin-based composites, some resin-based composites cured with LED lights may require additional curing time or smaller increments of thickness.