Comparison of two curing protocols during adhesive cementation: can the step luting technique supersede the traditional
- PDF / 683,832 Bytes
- 7 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 39 Downloads / 156 Views
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Comparison of two curing protocols during adhesive cementation: can the step luting technique supersede the traditional one? Vincenzo Tosco1 · Riccardo Monterubbianesi1 · Giulia Orilisi1 · Simona Sabbatini2 · Carla Conti2 · Mutlu Özcan3 · Angelo Putignano1 · Giovanna Orsini1 Received: 19 September 2019 / Accepted: 23 September 2020 © The Author(s) 2020
Abstract This study aims to compare the degree of conversion of two different curing protocols used during adhesive cementation. The following resin luting agents were tested: Hri Flow (MF) and pre-heated Hri Micerium (MH); light-cure Nexus Third Generation (NX3L) and dual-cure Nexus Third Generation (NX3D); dual cured RelyX Ultimate (RXU) and light-cure RelyX Veneers (RXL). For each tested material, ten samples were prepared and divided into two groups which had different curing protocols (P1 and P2): in P1, samples were cured for 40 s; in P2, samples were cured for 5 s, and then, after 20 s, cured again for additional 40 s. The degree of conversion (DC) was evaluated both during the first 5 min of the curing phase and after 1, 2, 7, 14 and 28 days (p = 0.05). Different trends were observed in DC values after 5 min by comparing P1 and P2. In both P1 and P2, DC decreased as follows, MH > MF > NX3L > RXL > RXU > NX3D. There were significant differences of DC values among all resin luting agents (p RXL > RXU > NX3D (p MF > > NX3L > RXL > R XU > NX3D; however, there were significant differences of DC values among the resin luting agents except between MH and MF, and NX3L and RXL (p
Data Loading...
