The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of light source, LED unit and halogen lamp (HL), on the effectiveness of Enforce dual-cured cement cured under a ceramic disc. Three exposure times (60, 80 and 120 s) were also evaluated. Two experimental groups, in which the polymerization of the dual-cured cement was performed through a ceramic disc, and two control groups, in which the polymerization of the dual-cured cement was performed directly without presence of ceramic disc were subdivided into three subgroups (three different exposure times), with five specimens each: G1A- HL 60s; G1B- HL 80s; G1C- HL 120s; G2A- LED 60s; G2B- LED 80s; G2C- LED 120s; and control groups: G3A- HL 60s; G3B- HL 80s; G3C- HL 120s; G4A- LED 60s; G4B- LED 80s and G4C- LED 120s. Cement was applied in a steel matrix (4mm diameter, 1.2mm thickness). In the experimental groups, a ceramic disc was placed on top. The cement was light-cured through the ceramic by a HL and LED, however, the control groups were cured without the ceramic disc. The specimens were stored in a light-proof container at 37ºC for 24 hours, then Vickers hardness was determined. A four-way ANOVA and Tukey test (p£ 0.05) were performed. All specimens cured by LED for 60s showed inferior values compared with the halogen groups. In general, light-curing by LED for 80s and 120s was comparable to halogen groups (60s and 80s) and their control groups. LED technology can be viable for light-curing through conventional ceramic indirect restorations, when curing time is increased in relation to HL curing time.
Resin cements; Microhardness test; Dental ceramic; Light emitting diode
