ORCID Profile
0000-0002-9502-3410
Current Organisations
University of Queensland
,
Cooroy Dental Surgery
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Begell House
Date: 2003
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-2002
DOI: 10.1111/J.1747-4477.2002.TB00402.X
Abstract: Composite resin is a widely-used direct tooth coloured restorative material. Photoactivation of the polymerisation reaction can be achieved by visible blue light from a range of light sources, including halogen l s, metal halide l s, plasma arc l s, and Light Emitting Diode (LED) lights. Concerns have been raised that curing lights may induce a temperature rise that could be detrimental to the vitality of the dental pulp during the act of photoactivation. The present study examined heat changes associated with standardised class V restorations on the buccal surface of extracted premolar teeth, using a curing time of 40 seconds. The independent effects of type of light source, resin shade, and remaining tooth thickness were assessed using a matrix experimental design. When a conventional halogen l , a metal halide l and two different LED lights were compared, it was found that both LED l s elicited minimal thermal changes at the level of the dental pulp, whereas the halogen l induced greater changes, and the metal halide l caused the greatest thermal insult of all the light sources. These thermal changes were influenced by resin shade, with different patterns for LED versus halogen or halide sources. Thermal stress reduced as the remaining thickness of tooth structure between the pulp and the cavity floor increased. From these results, it is concluded that LED lights produce the least thermal insult during photopolymerisation of composite resins.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 12-08-2022
DOI: 10.1111/EOS.12890
Abstract: Glass ionomer (GI) cements and self‐etch (SE) or universal adhesives after etching (ER) adapt variably with dentine. Dentine characteristics vary with depth (deep/shallow), location (central eripheral), and microscopic site (intertubular eritubular). To directly compare adhesion to dentine, non‐destructive imaging and testing are required. Here, GI, ER, and SE adapted at different dentine depths, locations, and sites were investigated using micro‐CT, xenon plasma focused ion beam scanning electron microscopy (Xe PFIB‐SEM), and energy dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy (EDS). Extracted molars were prepared to deep or shallow slices and treated with the three adhesives. Micro‐CT was used to compare changes to air volume gaps, following thermocycling, and statistically analysed using a quantile regression model and Fisher's exact test. The three adhesives performed similarly across dentine depths and locations, yet no change or overall increases and decreases in gaps at all dentine depths and locations were measured. The Xe PFIB‐SEM‐milled dentine‐adhesive interfaces facilitated high‐resolution characterization, and element profiling revealed variations across the tooth‐material interfaces. Dentine depth and location had no impact on adhesive durability, although microscopic differences were observed. Here we demonstrate how micro‐CT and Xe PFIB‐SEM can be used to compare variable dental materials without complex multi‐stage specimen preparation to minimize artefacts.
Publisher: University of Queensland Library
Date: 2023
DOI: 10.14264/3B7D466
No related grants have been discovered for Arosha Weerakoon.