| Literature DB >> 20027428 |
Michela M D S Sostena1, Renata A Nogueira, Carlos R Grandini, João Carlos Silos Moraes.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the glass transition temperature (Tg) and degree of conversion (DC) of a light-cured (Fill Magic) versus a chemically cured (Concise) orthodontic composite.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 20027428 PMCID: PMC4327515 DOI: 10.1590/s1678-77572009000600006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Appl Oral Sci ISSN: 1678-7757 Impact factor: 2.698
Orthodontic adhesives used in the study
| Material | Manufacturer | Polymerization mode | Monomers | Inorganic content (wt%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fill Magic | Vigodent SA, Rio | One paste, light-cured | BisGMA, Methacrylate | 38.1 |
| Concise | 3M ESPE, St. Paul. | Two pastes, chemically-cured | BisGMA, TEGDMA | 77.4 |
bisGMA = bisphenol A glycol dimetacrylate; TEGDMA = triethyleneglicol dimethacrylate.
Values obtained in the present study.
Glass transition temperature (Tg) and degree of conversion (DC) of the orthodontic composites evaluated in the study
| Material | Tg(°C) | DC (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Concise | 135 | 57.7a |
| Fill Magic | ||
| 40 s | 35 | 56.3a |
| 90 s | 50 | 56.5a |
| 120 s | 84 | 64.1b |
DC means follows by same small letter indicate no statistical difference by the Tukey's test at 5% of probability.
FIGURE 1Tangent delta for Concise and Fill Magic composites
FIGURE 2Tangent delta for Fill Magic composite for 40-and 120-s exposure times