Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Spectroscopy
Volume 2018, Article ID 8684245, 9 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8684245
Research Article

Polymerization Efficiency of a Dual-Cured Resin Cement through Zirconia with Three Different Cusp Inclinations

1Department of Prosthodontics, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
2School and Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China
3Testing Center of Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, China
4Institution of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Hui Cheng; moc.oohay@umjf.gnehciuh

Received 28 December 2017; Revised 25 March 2018; Accepted 6 May 2018; Published 20 June 2018

Academic Editor: Nikša Krstulović

Copyright © 2018 Chang-Yuan Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Assessing the polymerization efficiency of a dual-cured resin cement through zirconia with three different cusp inclinations is the aim of this study. Seventy-two resin cement (Multilink Speed) specimens were light-cured through the zirconia with three different cusp inclinations (30°, 20°, and 0°) for 20 s or 40 s (). For each group, the Vickers hardness (VH) measurement was performed on half of the specimens, whereas the degree of conversion (DC) was tested for the other half with a Fourier transform infrared spectrometer. The recorded data were analyzed with a two-way ANOVA. Varied VH (32.3 ± 3.2–40.3 ± 4.8) and DC (50.5% ± 3.0%–59.6% ± 2.4%) values were obtained from different groups. The cusp inclinations significantly affect the VH () and DC () of the resin cement, and the curing time exhibited a significant effect on the DC () of resin cement but not on the VH (). In conclusion, the cusp inclination of zirconia significantly affects the polymerization efficiency of dual-cured resin cement.

1. Introduction

Because of low solubility, high flexural strength, excellent physics and chemical properties, easy handling and favorable aesthetics [1, 2], resin cement has become the most commonly used luting agent in dentistry [3]. According to its curing mode, resin cement can be classified into three types: light-cured, self-cured (chemical-cured), and dual-cured. Light-cured resin cement allows enough working time for clinicians before polymerizing it with light-curing unit, but it is difficult to cure the resin cement in the areas that are far from the light source. Self-cured (chemical-cured) resin cement can be cured without light source, but having limited working time and technique sensitivity. Dual-cured resin cement was developed as an attempt to combine the advantages of light-cured and self-cured resin cement [4]. Once the dual-cured resin cement being mixed, it can be polymerized with/without light exposure. The chemical-polymerizing mechanism feature of dual-cured resin cement ensures adequate polymerization of resin cement in the areas that are not easily accessible for light [4, 5]. However, by itself, the self-polymerizing mechanism of dual-cured resin cement is not only slower but also less effective than when using light activation as a supplement [3]. Lee et al. [6] evaluated the polymerization of six dual-cured resin cements and concluded that the curing speed using the light-cured was 15 to 322 times faster than that using the chemical-cured. Therefore, an adequate light-cured resin cement is critical for the dual-cured resin cement [7].

As a popular material in rehabilitation dentistry, zirconia is usually bonded with dual-cured resin cement [8, 9]. When the light penetrates through zirconia, light energy would be compromised [1013], which affects the polymerization and clinical performance of resin cement [14]. However, most of the present studies investigating polymerization of resin cement through zirconia employed flat zirconia specimens [15, 16]. In reality, the surfaces of artificial zirconia-based restorations are not flat but with tooth cusps and other anatomical structures. The anatomical structures may affect the distance between the light source and the luting agent and affect the polymerization of light-cured resin cement eventually. Cusp inclinations are the most important structures on the surface of artificial restoration. Therefore, the purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of cusp inclination of zirconia on the polymerization efficiency of a dual-cured resin cement. The null hypotheses were as follows: (1) the cusp inclination of zirconia would not affect the surface microhardness of the dual-cured resin cement and (2) the cusp inclination of zirconia would not affect the degree of conversion of the dual-cured resin cement.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Monolithic Zirconia Design

Three stereolithography files were drawn with a three-dimensional computer-aided design (CAD) software (Solidworks, Dassault System), simulating three different cusp inclinations of 30°, 20°, and 0°, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of the monolithic zirconia specimen design. The length and width of monolithic zirconia were 10.0 mm, and the thickness was 1.0 mm. The monolithic zirconia specimen consisted of two planes: the angles between the plane and horizontal were (a) 30°, simulating 30° cusp inclination and (b) 20°, simulating 20° cusp inclination. (c) The monolithic zirconia specimen was a flat plane, simulating 0° cusp inclination.
2.2. Monolithic Zirconia Preparation

The designed stereolithography files were imported into the ZENOTEC CAD software program (Wieland), and 72 monolithic zirconia (the tested groups are shown in Table 1, for each group, 6 for VH test and 6 for DC test) were milled from zirconia blocks (Wieland) in Vita shade A2 color and sintered in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. The characteristics of monolithic zirconia are shown in Table 2.

Table 1: Tested groups of the study.
Table 2: Characteristics of the monolithic zirconia tested.
2.3. Specimen Preparation

A commercial dual-cured resin cement (Multilink Speed, Ivoclar Vivadent) was used for present study. The dual-cured resin cement was mixed following the manufacturer’s instructions, placed into a customized rubber mold, and then covered with a Mylar strip (0.05 mm in thickness, Microdont). The monolithic zirconia was put above the Mylar strip. Finally, the dual-cured resin cement was light-cured for 20 s or 40 s by a light-curing unit (Elipar S10, 3M-ESPE) with an intensity of 1200 mW/cm2 from the zirconia upper surface. During the polymerization procedure, the light-curing unit tip was kept in close contact with the zirconia border (Figure 2). The intensity of the light-curing unit was verified with a radiometer (Bluephase, Ivoclar Vivadent) after five resin cement specimens were light-cured. After polymerization, the dimensions of the resin cement specimens were identified with a digital caliper (Peakmeter, Shenzhen Xin Huayi Instrument Co., Ltd.). The length of the resin cement specimen was 8.0 mm, and the width of resin cement specimen was 4.7 mm (30° cusp inclination groups), 4.3 mm (20° cusp inclination groups), or 8.0 mm (0° cusp inclination groups). The thickness of the resin cement specimens was 0.5 mm. Then, the resin cement specimens were stored at room temperature in a light-proof box for 24 h to avoid further exposure to light [17].

Figure 2: The light polymerization procedure of the resin cement under zirconia of (a) 0° cusp inclination and (b) 20° or 30° cusp inclination.
2.4. Surface Microhardness Measurement

The microhardness of the resin cement specimens’ surfaces that are close to the monolithic zirconia were tested with a digital Vickers hardness tester (HXD-1000TM/LCD) with 250-gram force for 15 s [18]. Every resin cement specimen was tested at three randomized locations, and relevant values were averaged as a single Vickers hardness (VH) for each resin cement specimen [19].

2.5. Degree of Conversion (DC) Measurement

Sixty milligrams of bromatum kalium powders was pressed by a tablet machine (Specac 2T) for 15 s, and the tablet was tested by a Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometer (Thermo Scientific Nicolet iS50 FTIR) as the test background. Then, a small amount of unpolymerized resin cement was mixed with bromatum kalium powders at a ratio of 1 : 150, and sixty mg of the mixed powder was pressed by a tablet machine and tested by FTIR. The resin cement specimens were then smashed into powder and mixed with bromatum kalium powders at a ratio of 1 : 150. Sixty mg of the mixed powder was pressed into a tablet and tested by FTIR. The settings of the FTIR were as follows: 4000–650 cm−1 range, 4 cm−1 resolution, and 32 scans per spectrum. The spectra were recorded.

The absorption peaks of the aromatic double bonds were recorded at 1590 cm−1 (), and the peaks of the aliphatic double bonds were recorded at 1638 cm−1 () [20, 21].

The DC was calculated by the following equation [2224]:where and are the areas of the absorption peaks of the polymerized dual-cured resin cement and and are the areas of the absorption peaks of the unpolymerized dual-cured resin cement.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

VH and DC values were statistically analyzed using a software package (SPSS 20.0, IBM) at a significance level of 0.05. The Shapiro–Wilk test was applied to confirm the normal distribution of the data before the ANOVA. Two-way ANOVA was employed to determine the factors which affect the VH and DC.

3. Results and Discussion

The mean and standard deviation VH and DC values of all tested groups are shown in Table 3. The representative FTIR spectra are shown in Figure 3. Two-way ANOVA reveals that cusp inclination significantly affected the VH () and DC () of the resin cement (Tables 4 and 5). The curing time did not significantly affected the VH () but significantly affected the DC () of the resin cement. No significant interaction was found between cusp inclination and curing time ( for VH and for DC).

Table 3: The mean and standard deviation of VH and DC values for the tested groups.
Figure 3: Representative FTIR spectra of all tested groups. (a) Unpolymerized resin cement; (b) A1 tested group; (c) A2 tested group; (d) B1 tested group; (e) B2 tested group; (f) C1 tested group; (g) C2 tested group.
Table 4: Two-way ANOVA for the VH values.
Table 5: Two-way ANOVA for the DC values.

Based on the results, all the null hypotheses were rejected. The extent of polymerization affects the mechanical properties of resin cement [25], and the mechanical properties of resin cement determine the long-term success of restoration [3]. It has been revealed that the light-curing mode [26], light intensity [27], shade [28] and thickness [29] of ceramics, curing protocol [30], and other factors may influence the polymerization efficiency of resin cement. The light can be absorbed and scattered by the structures of restoration [31], but limited information in the literature about the influence of anatomical structures of artificial restoration on the polymerization of resin cement is present. The ordinary cusp inclinations of posterior teeth are 30° and 20°, and 0° refers to the labial surface of the anterior teeth. Therefore, three characteristic zirconia specimens were designed to simulate the ordinary cusp inclinations. Moreover, the length and width of the zirconia were set in accordance with the diameter of light-curing unit tip (10 mm).

There are several methods used to test the polymerization efficiency of resin cement, and the microhardness and DC are the most commonly used indications in the literature [20, 32, 33]. Surface microhardness is an important indication reflecting the polymerization efficiency of resin cement directly [34, 35]. Hardness is an intrinsic property of materials independent of the hardness test methods employed [36]. The VH test was chosen for the present study which is analogous to the previous studies [3739]. Differences in hardness between the top and bottom surfaces of the specimen were frequently used to detect the polymerization, but the present study employed a different specimen design (much thinner than those in the published studies). After curing, the bottom surface of the resin cement specimen was not good enough for the hardness test. Considering the aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of cusp inclination of zirconia on polymerization of resin cement, testing of the upper surface of resin cement can also indirectly reveal the polymerization efficiency.

DC is a key factor which plays a decisive role in the properties of resin cement and the prognosis of restoration [40]. In the literature, DC of resin cement is determined by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy [41]. FTIR spectroscopy offers a direct approach to evaluate the depth of polymerization and is considered to be the best method [42, 43]. DC has been determined using the areas’ ratio of peaks corresponding to aliphatic (1638 cm−1) and aromatic (1608 cm−1) of the FTIR spectra. However, FTIR spectra of methacrylate-based dental materials also present other peaks related to carbon bond stretching, at 1715 cm−1 and 1580 cm−1. Additionally, 1608 cm−1 is a representative FTIR spectrum of Bis-GMA, which cannot be found in TEGDMA [44]. Since the tested resin cement (Multilink Speed) in the present study is mainly based on TEGDMA and UDMA, 1590 cm−1 was used in the analysis of FTIR spectra.

The values of VH and DC in 0° cusp inclination (flat) zirconia were in agreement with the previous studies [19, 21, 45, 46]. The highest values of VH and DC were observed in C2 (0° cusp inclination) group, and the lowest values were found in A1 (30° cusp inclination) group. This phenomenon may be explained as follows: Firstly, the distance between light source center and the resin cement was different for each group. For groups C1 and C2 (0° cusp inclination), the distance was 1.00 mm (just the thickness of zirconia). As to groups B1 and B2 (20° cusp inclination), the distance was 2.70 mm (includes the thickness of zirconia). For groups A1 and A2 (30° cusp inclination), the distance was 3.50 mm (includes the thickness of zirconia). It has been reported that when the distance between the light source and the resin cement was greater than 2 mm, the resin cement became difficult to polymerize [47]. Secondly, because the light beam was not perpendicular to the zirconia surface for the A and B (30° and 20° cusp inclination) groups, the actual distance of the light transmitted from the zirconia surface to the resin cement was more than 1.0 mm. However, the thickness of the light transmitted from the zirconia surface to the resin cement was 1.0 mm for C (0° cusp inclination) groups. As the thickness of restoration increases, the polymerization efficiency of resin cement decreases [48]. Thirdly, the direction of light affects the energy transmission. In order to improve the polymerization efficiency, the light beam should be kept perpendicular to the restoration [49]. However, the light beam was angled to the inclined surfaces and resin cement because of obstruction of the tooth cusp in the A and B (20° and 30° cusp inclination) groups, while the light beam was perpendicular to the restoration surface and the resin cement in the C (0° cusp inclination) groups.

Lower VH and DC values are synonymous of incomplete polymerization of resin cement, which resulted in increasing water absorption [50] and microleakage [51]. Based on the present findings, the clinicians should be advised to select a light-curing unit tip with relatively small diameter and make the light-curing unit tip positioned perpendicular to the tooth-inclined surfaces when light cure the resin cement through zirconia restorations with a high cusp inclination. Moreover, since curing time significantly () affects the DC of the resin cement in this study and the VH of specimens cured 40 s was higher, it seems that prolonging curing time is necessary and useful to improve the polymerization efficiency of resin cement [52].

Undoubtedly, the structures of restoration are much more complicated than the present study’s setting. Further in vitro and in vivo studies are needed to confirm the present findings.

4. Conclusions

Within the limitations of the present study, the following conclusions may be drawn: the cusp inclination of zirconia significantly affected the polymerization efficiency of dual-cured resin cement. The polymerization efficiency of dual-cured resin cement decreased as the cusp inclination increased.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Authors’ Contributions

Chang-Yuan Zhang and Hao Yu contributed equally to this work.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the financial support of Technology Innovation Project from Hospital of Stomatology, Fujian Medical University (Grant no. 2017-KQKJ-06).

References

  1. S. Duarte Jr., A. C. Botta, M. Meire, and A. Sadan, “Microtensile bond strengths and scanning electron microscopic evaluation of self-adhesive and self-etch resin cements to intact and etched enamel,” Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 203–210, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. T. Hitz, B. Stawarczyk, J. Fischer, C. H. Hämmerle, and I. Sailer, “Are self-adhesive resin cements a valid alternative to conventional resin cements? A laboratory study of the long-term bond strength,” Dental Materials, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 1183–1190, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  3. N. Tanoue, Y. Koishi, M. Atsuta, and H. Matsumura, “Properties of dual-curable luting composites polymerized with single and dual curing modes,” Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 1015–1021, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. R. Zuellig-Singer, I. Krejci, and F. Lutz, “Effects of cement-curing modes on dentin bonding of inlays,” Journal of Dental Research, vol. 71, no. 11, pp. 1842–1846, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. O. Kumbuloglu, L. V. Lassila, A. User, and P. K. Vallittu, “A study of the physical and chemical properties of four resin composite luting cements,” International Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 357–363, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  6. I. B. Lee, W. An, J. Chang, and C. M. Um, “Influence of ceramic thickness and curing mode on the polymerization shrinkage kinetics of dual-cured resin cements,” Dental Materials, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 1141–1147, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. R. R. Moraes, L. Correr-Sobrinho, M. A. Sinhoreti, R. M. Puppin-Rontani, F. A. Ogliari, and E. Piva, “Light-activation of resin cement through ceramic: relationship between irradiance intensity and bond strength to dentin,” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part B: Applied Biomaterials, vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 160–165, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. J. J. Lee, C. K. Kang, J. W. Oh, J. M. Seo, and J. M. Park, “Evaluation of shear bond strength between dual cure resin cement and zirconia ceramic after thermocycling treatment,” Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. V. Turp, D. Sen, E. Poyrazoglu, B. Tuncelli, and G. Goller, “Influence of zirconia base and shade difference on polymerization efficiency of dual-cure resin cement,” Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 361–365, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. N. Scotti, A. Comba, M. Cadenaro et al., “Effect of lithium disilicate veneers of different thickness on the degree of conversion and microhardness of a light-curing and a dual-curing cement,” International Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 384–388, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. K. Harada, A. J. Raigrodski, K. H. Chung, B. D. Flinn, S. Dogan, and L. A. Mancl, “A comparative evaluation of the translucency of zirconias and lithium disilicate for monolithic restorations,” Journal of Prosthetics Dentistry, vol. 116, no. 2, pp. 257–263, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. R. N. Kuguimiya, K. M. Rode, P. M. Carneiro, A. C. Aranha, and M. L. Turbino, “Influence of curing units and indirect restorative materials on the hardness of two dualcuring resin cements evaluated by the nanoindentation test,” Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 243–248, 2015. View at Google Scholar
  13. N. Ilie and B. N. Stawarczyk, “Quantification of the amount of blue light passing through monolithic zirconia with respect to thickness and polymerization conditions,” Journal of Prosthetics Dentistry, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 114–121, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. A. Vanderlei, S. P. Passos, M. Özcan, M. A. Bottino, and L. F. Valandro, “Durability of adhesion between feldspathic ceramic and resin cements: effect of adhesive resin, polymerization mode of resin cement, and aging,” Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 196–202, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. S. Y. Lee, C. B. Cho, J. Y. Koak, and S. E. Yang, “The effect of zirconia thickness and curing time on shear bond strength of dualcure resin cement,” Dental Materials Journal, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 132–137, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. C. Park, S. H. Yoo, S. W. Park et al., “The effect of plasma on shear bond strength between resin cement and colored zirconia,” Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 118–123, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. S. P. Passos, E. T. Kimpara, M. A. Bottino, G. C. Santos Jr., and A. S. Rizkalla, “Effect of ceramic shade on the degree of conversion of a dual-cure resin cement analyzed by FTIR,” Dental Materials, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 317–323, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. S. H. Cho, A. Lopez, D. W. Berzins, S. Prasad, and K. W. Ahn, “Effect of different thicknesses of pressable ceramic veneers on polymerization of light-cured and dual-cured resin cements,” Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 347–352, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  19. M. Cadenaro, C. O. Navarra, F. Antoniolli et al., “The effect of curing mode on extent of polymerization and microhardness of dual-cured, self-adhesive resin cements,” American Journal of Dentistry, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 14–18, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  20. P. A. Calgaro, A. Y. Furuse, G. M. Correr, B. P. Ornaghi, and C. C. Gonzaga, “Influence of the interposition of ceramic spacers on the degree of conversion and the hardness of resin cements,” Brazil Oral Research, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 403–409, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. Y. L. Yan, Y. K. Kim, K. H. Kim, and T. Y. Kwon, “Changes in degree of conversion and microhardness of dental resin cements,” Operative Dentistry, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 203–210, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. M. Inokoshi, P. Pongprueksa, J. De Munck et al., “Influence of light irradiation through zirconia on the degree of conversion of composite cements,” Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 161–171, 2016. View at Google Scholar
  23. V. R. Novais, L. H. Raposo, R. R. Miranda, C. C. Lopes, P. C. Júnior Simamoto, and C. J. Soares, “Degree of conversion and bond strength of resin-cements to feldspathic ceramic using different curing modes,” Journal of Applied Oral Science, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 61–68, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. X. Ge, Q. Ye, L. Song, J. S. Laurence, A. Misra, and P. Spencer, “Probing the dual function of a novel tertiary amine compound in dentin adhesive formulations,” Dental Materials, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 519–528, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. A. Tezvergil-Mutluay, L. V. Lassila, and P. K. Vallittu, “Degree of conversion of dual-cure luting resins light-polymerized through various materials,” Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 201–205, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. S. M. Mousavinasab, M. Atai, N Salehi, and A Salehi, “Effect of shade and light curing mode on the degree of conversion of silorane-based and methacrylate-based resin composites,” Journal of Dental Biomaterials, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 299–305, 2016. View at Google Scholar
  27. M. Bahari, S. Savadi Oskoee, S. Kimyai, N. Mohammadi, and E. Saati Khosroshahi, “Effect of light intensity on the degree of conversion of dual-cured resin cement at different depths with the use of translucent fiber posts,” Journal of Dentistry, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 248–255, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  28. M. L. Myers, W. F. Caughman, and F. A. Rueggeberg, “Effect of restoration composition, shade, and thickness on the cure of a photoactivated resin cement,” Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 149–157, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. J. W. Lee, H. S. Cha, and J. H. Lee, “Curing efficiency of various resin-based materials polymerized through different ceramic thicknesses and curing time,” Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 126–131, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. M. D. S. Lanza, M. R. B. Andreeta, T. A. Pegoraro, L. F. Pegoraro, and R. M. Carvalho, “Influence of curing protocol and ceramic composition on the degree of conversion of resin cement,” Journal of Applied Oral Science, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 700–707, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. P. A. Acquaviva, F. Cerutti, G. Adami et al., “Degree of conversion of three composite materials employed in the adhesive cementation of indirect restorations: a micro-Raman analysis,” Journal of Dentistry, vol. 31, no. 8, pp. 610–615, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. D. da Costa Neto, J. Pereira, S. Pamato, and A. do Valle, “The effect of lithium disilicate opacity on polymerization of a dual-cured resin cement,” European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 15–19, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. M. M. AlShaafi, M. Q. AlQahtani, and R. B. Price, “Effect of exposure time on the polymerization of resin cement through ceramic,” Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 129–135, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  34. I. Cekic-Nagas and G. Ergun, “Effect of different light curing methods on mechanical and physical properties of resin-cements polymerized through ceramic discs,” Journal of Applied Oral Science, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 403–412, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. F. H. Aguiar, A. T. Braceiro, G. M. Ambrosano, and J. R. Lovadino, “Hardness and diametrical tensile strength of a hybrid composite resin polymerized with different modes and immersed in ethanol or distilled water medium,” Dental Materials, vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 1098–1103, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. G. B. Ghorbala, A. Tricoteauxa, A. Thuaulta, G. Louisb, and D. Chicot, “Comparison of conventional Knoop and Vickers hardness of ceramic materials,” Journal of European Ceramic Society, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 2531–2535, 2017. View at Google Scholar
  37. N. Ilie, “Transmitted irradiance through ceramics: effect on the mechanical properties of a luting resin cement,” Clinical Oral Investigations, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 1183–1190, 2017. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. L. Gregor, S. Bouillaguet, I. Onisor, S. Ardu, I. Krejci, and G. T. Rocca, “Microhardness of light- and dual-polymerizable luting resins polymerized through 7.5-mm-thick endocrowns,” Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 942–948, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. D. Shiomuki, H. Minami, T. Tanaka, and S. Suzuki, “Influence of light irradiation on Vickers hardness of dual-cure cement polymerized under restorations,” Dental Materials Journal, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 449–455, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. J. D. Noronha Filho, N. L. Brandão, L. T. Poskus, J. G. Guimarães, and E. M. Silva, “A critical analysis of the degree of conversion of resin-based luting cements,” Journal of Applied Oral Science, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 442–446, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  41. P. C. Komori, A. B. de Paula, A. A. Martin, R. N. Tango, M. A. Sinhoreti, and L. Correr-Sobrinho, “Effect of light energy density on conversion degree and hardness of dual-cured resin cement,” Operative Dentistry, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 120–124, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. R. Bansal, S. Taneja, and M. Kumari, “Effect of ceramic type, thickness, and time of irradiation on degree of polymerization of dual-cure resin cement,” Journal of Conservative Dentistry, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 414–418, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. F. H. Rasetto, C. F. Driscoll, V. Prestipino, R. Masri, and J. A. von Fraunhofer, “Light transmission through all-ceramic dental materials: a pilot study,” Journal of Prosthetics Dentistry, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 441–446, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  44. F. M. Collares, F. F. Portella, V. C. Leitune, and S. M. Samuel, “Discrepancies in degree of conversion measurements by FTIR,” Brazilian Oral Research, vol. 28, pp. 9–15, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  45. N. Ozturk, A. Usumez, S. Usumez, and B. Ozturk, “Degree of conversion and surface hardness of resin cement cured with different curing units,” Quintessence International, vol. 36, no. 10, pp. 771–77, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  46. C. Lopes Cde, R. B. Rodrigues, A. L. Silva, P. C. Simamoto Júnior, C. J. Soares, and V. R. Novais, “Degree of conversion and mechanical properties of resin cements cured through different all-ceramic systems,” Brazil Dental Journal, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 484–489, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. F. H. Aguiar, C. R. Lazzari, D. A. Lima, G. M. Ambrosano, and J. R. Lovadino, “Effect of light curing tip distance and resin shade on microhardness of a hybrid resin composite,” Brazil Oral Research, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 302–306, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  48. C. J. Soares, N. R. da Silva, and R. B. Fonseca, “Influence of the feldspathic ceramic thickness and shade on the microhardness of dual resin cement,” Operative Dentistry, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 384–389, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. R. B. Price, M. E. McLeod, and C. M. Felix, “Quantifying light energy delivered to a Class I restoration,” Journal of the Canadian Dental Association, vol. 76, p. a23, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  50. S. Uctasli, U. Hasanreisoglu, and H. J. Wilson, “The attenuation of radiation by porcelain and its effect on polymerization of resin cements,” Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 565–575, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. H. Jung, K. H. Friedl, K. A. Hiller, A. Haller, and G. Schmalz, “Curing efficiency of different polymerization methods through ceramic restorations,” Clinical Oral Investigations, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 156–161, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. L. Feng, R. Carvalho, and B. I. Suh, “Insufficient cure under the condition of high irradiance and short irradiation time,” Dental Materials, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 283–289, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus