Cumhuriyet Dental Journal

Volume 19 Issue 3

doi: 10.7126/cumudj.298879

available at http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/cumudj/
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Light Transmission of Different Resin

Composites at Different Thicknesses
Serkan SARIDAĞ1, Neslihan ÇÖKÜK2, Emine KARA3, Ege KÖSELER 1
1
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Kocaeli, Kocaeli, Turkey
2
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Yuzuncu Yil, Van, Turkey
3
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Yuzuncu Yil, Van, Turkey

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the light transmission of different types
Article history:
and thicknesses of composites.
Received 06.11.2015
Materials and Methods: Disk-shaped (N = 240, n = 10 per group) samples of ten direct
Accepted 14.04.2016 composites (Aelite-Aesthetic -Enamel, Aelite-LS-Posterior, Aelite-All-Purpose-Body,
Clearfil-Majesty-ES-2 Classic, Filtek Ultimate-Enamel, Filtek Z-250 Universal, G-ænial
Anterior, Gradia Direct, IPS Empress Direct, and Tetric N-Ceram) and two indirect
Keywords: composites (Estenia C&B and Signum-Ceramis) with diameters of 10 mm and thicknesses
of 1 and 2 mm were fabricated. The translucency of each sample was determined with a
Composite, filler, indirect composites,
digital radiometer using the direct transmission method and a 1200 mW/cm2 LED beam
light transmission, radiometer.
as the light source. Measurements were repeated three times for each specimen, and the
obtained data were analyzed using ANOVA and Duncan multiple range tests (α = 0.05).

Results: The materials with the highest light transmission values included the Filtek
Ultimate-Enamel (1 mm: 8.36 lux, 2 mm: 4.62 lux), Gradia Direct (1 mm: 8.57 lux, 2 mm:
4.65 lux), and Tetric N-Ceram, while those with the lowest light transmission values
included the Aelite-All-Purpose-Body (1 mm: 2.89 lux, 2 mm: 1.21 lux) and Estenia C&B
composites.

Conclusions: The type of composite, as well as the particle size and filler content,
significantly affected the light transmission characteristics.

Keywords: Composite, filler, indirect composites, light transmission, radiometer.

197
Correspondence author at: Serkan SARIDAĞ, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Kocaeli, Kocaeli,
Turkiye. E-mail: ssaridag@hotmail.com
Saridag, et al.: Light Transmission of Different Resin Composites at Different Thicknesses

INTRODUCTION considered. Nanometer-sized filler particles

improve the optical properties of
Light-cured dental resin composite composite resins because their diameters
restorative materials are widely used in are much smaller than the wavelength of
dentistry to create permanent tooth-colored visible light, and thus they cannot be seen
restorations.1,2 Dental resin composites by the human eye.13,14 When light
applied directly or indirectly occupy a illuminates a resin composite, it is
paramount position and present acceptable scattered at the surfaces of the filler
clinical performance with much lower particles, diffuses in multiple directions,
costs than their ceramic counterparts.3-4 A and can be detected as diffuse transmission
dental composite resin typically comprises and straight-line transmission.15,16 For
an organic resin matrix, inorganic filler composite restorations, particularly those
particles, silane coupling agents, and used to restore missing natural enamel, the
photo-polymerization initiators and thickness is also critical, because a slight
activators.5,6 Dental composites have increase in the thickness may significantly
typically been classified according to their change the light transmission and color
filler characteristics, particularly the particle value of the restoration.17,18
size. Currently, three categories have been It is important to note that the final results
proposed for resin composite filler particles: of any restoration depend on the thickness
microfilled composites, microhybrid and the degree of light transmission of the
composites, and nanocomposites (nanofilled composite. Among commercial brands,
or nanohybrid resin composites).7,8 there is no general agreement on the
Microhybrid composites are composed of translucency levels of composite resins or
high density filller particles of different sizes their designations. There have also been no
(15–20 μm and 0.01–0.05 μm) and have reports in the literature that establish
good mechanical properties, but relatively standards for these materials.17,19,20 The
poor aesthetic qualities.8,9 Microfilled aim of this in vitro study was therefore to
composites have been developed to obtain evaluate the light transmission of different
high-quality aesthetic materials, but have types and thicknesses of resin composites.
relatively poor mechanical properties. The It was expected that the amount of
average particle size of these composite filler transmitted light would differ for both
particles falls in the range 0.01-0.05 μm.9-11 direct and indirect composites with
Nanocomposites or submicroncomposites different filler loadings, resin matrices, and
have increased filler loadings and reduced thicknesses.
organic matrix contents, and, consequently,
improved mechanical and optical MATERIALS AND METHODS
characteristics. Their average particle size
falls in the range 20–75 nm. Nanofill is a Specimen preparation
composite resin that is composed of both
nanomers and nanoclusters, whereas a Disk-shaped (N = 240, n = 10 per group)
nanohybrid is a hybrid resin composite with samples of ten direct composites (Aelite
a nanofiller in a prepolymerised filler Aesthetic Enamel, Aelite LS Posterior,
form.11-13 Aelite All-Purpose Body, Clearfil Majesty
ES-2 Classic, Filtek Ultimate Enamel,
Given the aesthetic requirements for Filtek Z 250 Universal, G-ænial Anterior,
different direct and indirect composite Gradia Direct Posterior, IPS Empress
systems, light transmission should be
198
Saridag, et al.: Light Transmission of Different Resin Composites at Different Thicknesses

Direct Dentin, and Tetric N-Ceram) and in a universal laboratory polymerization

two indirect composites (Estenia C&B and unit (Blue Thunder, Toei Electric Co., Ltd,
Signum Ceramis) with diameters of 10 mm Kanagawa-Ken, Japan) at 250 W using 3
and thicknesses of 1 and 2 mm were halogen lamps at wavelengths ranging
fabricated in shade A2. The tested from 350–550 nm for 3 min. All specimens
materials, their chemical compositions, were polished using 600 and 1000 grit
manufacturers, and batch numbers are silicon carbide paper (SiC, Struers GmbH,
listed in Table 1. Willich, Germany) and then cleaned
ultrasonically in 70% ethyl alcohol. The
Table 1. Brand names, manufacturers, batch numbers, and types thickness of each sample was determined
of organic matrices and inorganic filler for the direct and using a digital micrometer (Mitutoyo
indirect resin composites used in this study (as provided by the
manufacturers) America Corporation, Aurora, IL, USA) in
No. Brand
Manufacturer
(Batch
Type Organic
Filler
order to confirm that it remained within the
(Direct/Indirect) Matrix
number)
critical tolerance of 0.01 mm. All of the
Bisco Inc.,
Aelite All-
Purpose
Schaumburg,
IL, USA
Microhybrid
Ethoxylated
bis-DMA,
Glass filler,
amorphous silica composite specimens were stored dry in
Body (Direct)
1 (1300008846)
TEGDMA (76 wt%)
the dark at room temperature for 24 hours
Bisco Inc.,

2
Aelita
Aesthetic
Schaumburg,
IL, USA
Nanohybrid Bis-GMA, Bis-
Glass filler,
amorphous silica prior to light transmission analysis.
(Direct) EMA
Enamel (73 wt%)
(1300008896)

Aelite LS
Bisco Inc.
Schaumburg, Hybrid
Ethoxylated Glass filler, Light transmission measurements
bis-GMA amorphous silica
Posterior IL, USA
3 (Direct)
(1300006911)
(88 wt%)
The translucency of each sample was
Clearfil Kuraray

4
Majesty Medical Inc., Nanohybrid Bis-GMA,
Barium glass,
silica
determined by measuring its direct
Tokyo, Japan (Direct) dimethacrylate
ES-2
Classic (0014A)
(78 wt%)
transmission of a band of light generated
Hybrid UTMA,
Surface treated
alumina micro by an LED (3M Espe Elipartm Freelight 2,
Estania Kuraray filler, silanated
5
C&B Medical Inc. (Indirect) Methacrylate glass ceramic filler Germany) with an output power of 1200
(000433)

Bis-GMA,
(92 wt%)
mW/cm2.21 Each polymerization light had
Filtek 3M ESPE, St. Silica, zirconia
6 Ultimate Paul, MN, USA
Nanohybrid
(Direct)
UDMA,
TEGDMA, Bis-
(72,5 wt%) a light guided, 7.4-mm-diameter tip. The
Enamel (N251021)
EMA
power irradiated by the LED without the
7
Filtek Z
250
3M ESPE, St.
Paul, MN, USA
Microhybrid Bis-GMA,
UDMA, Bis-
Silica, zirconia interposition of the composites and the
Universal (N587651)
(Direct) EMA (82 wt%)
distances (2 mm and 1 mm) between the
light tip of the unit and the digital
bis-DMA: Bisphenol A dimethacrylate; TEGDMA:
Triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate; bis-GMA: Bisphenol A radiometer (SDI LED Radiometer; SDI
diglycidyl methacrylate; ArDMA: Aromatic dimethacrylates
UDMA: Urethane dimethacrylate; bis-EMA: Bisphenol A
Dental Limited Australia; spectral range:
diethoxymethacrylate; TEGMA: Triethylene glycole 400 to 525 nm) were the same as those for
dimethacrylate; PEGDMA: Polyethylene glycol dimethacrylates;
UDMA: Urethane dimethacrylate; UTMA: Urethane the sample groups. The sample diameter
tetramethacrylate. was the same as the distance from the
radiometer’s optical eye. To avoid any
Each specimen was prepared using a light losses, appropriate silicon impression
stainless steel mold in one step. In order to materials were prepared around the light
prevent any voids, a glass plate was gently tips, and the specimens were embedded in
pressed over the mold, and the composite silicon (Fig. 1). Each sample was placed on
was photopolymerized using an LED the radiometer and irradiated for 20 s to
polymerization unit (Elipar Freelight 2, 3M determine the light transmission. The
ESPE, St. Paul, USA) for 40 seconds from measurement was repeated three times for
each direction after removal of the each specimen, and the average was value
stainless steel mold. Post-polymerization was recorded in units of mW/cm2. The
of the indirect composites was performed translucency was repeated for the same

199
Saridag, et al.: Light Transmission of Different Resin Composites at Different Thicknesses

material at the second thickness, and then Interaction between these two factors was
the obtained data were converted to light also significant (p < 0.001). Furthermore,
units (lux). for both thicknesses, there were
statistically significant differences (p <
0.05) between the direct composite group
(1 mm: 2.82 lux–8.57; 2 mm: 1.21–4.75
lux) and the indirect composite group (1
mm: 3.6–5.89 lux; 2 mm: 1.31–2.81 lux).
Table 2. Light transmission values (means and standard
deviations (SD)) for the resin composite samples used in this
study. Different lowercase letters in the same column indicate
significant differences (p < 0.05). Different uppercase letter in
same row indicate significant differecences at p < 0.05 level.
Mean± (Mean1-
Mean± (SD)(lx) Percentage
No. Materials (SD)(lx) Mean2)
2 mm. change(%)
1 mm. Difference±SD
1 Aelite All-Purpose Body 2.89±0.22h 1.21±0.06f 1.68±0.16** 57±0.04b

2 Aelite Aesthetic Enamel 4.25±0.27f 1.79±0.09e 2.46±0.20** 57±0.03b

3 Aelite LS Posterior 2.82±0.24h 1.81±0.14e 1.01±0.20** 35±0.05h

Clearfil Majesty ES-2 3.21±0.27** 50±0.04c.d

Fig.1. Schematic diagram of the experimental setup for light 4
Classic
6.35±0.22d 3.14±0.31c

transmission determination using a radiometer. 5 Estania C&B 3.60±0.19g 1.31±0.16f 2.29±0.18** 63±0.06a

6 Filtek Ultimate Enamel 8.36±0.43a.b 4.62±0.26a 3.74±0.36** 44±0.03g.f

Statistical analysis 7

8
Filtek Z 250 Universal

G-ænial Anterior
7.11±0.23c

7.21±0.33c
3.69±0.0.1b

3.67±0.21b
3.41±0.29**

3.54±0.28**
47±0.05d.e.f

49±0.02d.c.e

9 Gradia Direct 8.57±0.41a 4.65±0.25a 3.92±0.34** 45±0.03f.e

All statistical analyses were performed 10 IPS Empress Direct Dentin 4.24±0.17f 1.86±0.11e 2.38±0.14** 56±0.03b

using SAS version 9.3. To obtain 11

12
Signum Ceramis

Tetric N-Ceram
5.89±0.31e

8.14±0.44b
2.81±0.27d

4.75±0.24a
3.08±0.29**

3.38±0.35**
52±0.03c

41±0.03g

descriptive statistics and normality tests, Total 5.78±2.08A 2.94±1.30B 2.84±1.71** 50±0.08

results were expressed as Proc Means and **: p<0.0001 (p value from independent samples t test)
Proc Univarite commands, respectively.
Factorial ANOVA was used to compare
the mean results for the twelve groups of The light transmission values for all of the
samples with different thicknesses in order 1-mm-thick specimens were higher than
to determine whether they differed those for the 2-mm-thick specimens.
significantly from one another (p < 0.05). (p<0.0001).
Duncan's test was used for multiple The highest light transmission values were
comparisons. To compare thickness means observed for the Gradia Direct (1 mm: 8.57
within each group was used two lux., 2 mm:4.65 lux.), Filtek Ultimate
independent sample t test method with Enamel (1 mm:8.36 lux., 2 mm: 4.62 lux.),
Proc TTEST. One-way ANOVA was used and Tetric N-Ceram (1 mm:8.14 lux., 2
to analyze the means of the translucency mm:4.75 lux.). Aelite All-Purpose Body (1
ratios of the groups. The factorial mm 2.89 lux., 2 mm:1.21 lux.) and Estenia
ANOVA, One-way ANOVA, and Duncan C&B (1mm 3.6 lux., 2 mm:1.31 lux.),
results were analyzed using Proc GLM in resin composites had the lowest light
SAS. transmission values. Furthermore, the
Estenia C&B and Aelite LS Posterior
RESULTS samples exhibited the least change in the
maximum percent light transmittance when
Table 2 lists the light transmission data the thickness was increased (0.63 and 0.35,
(means and standard deviations) for the 1- respectively; p < 0.05).
and 2-nm-thick samples of the investigated
materials. Light transmission was
significantly affected by the composite
type (p < 0.05) and thickness (p < 0.001).

200
Saridag, et al.: Light Transmission of Different Resin Composites at Different Thicknesses

DISCUSSION Nanohybrid resin composites have been

reported to have high translucency because
In the present study, the light transmission the particles are smaller than the
of direct and indirect composites with wavelength of light and cause minimal or
different chemical compositions was zero scattering of photons.25,26 In fact, in
investigated as a function of composite the present study, similar results were
thickness using digital radiometer obtained. Among the indirect composites,
measurements. Because the results were the Signum Ceramis hybrid-type
significantly affected by the composite composite specimens exhibited
type, the null hypothesis could be rejected. significantly higher light transmission than
Typical dentin composites are constructed the Estenia C&B hybrid-type composite at
using high-opacity composite resins with a both thicknesses.
translucency close to that of natural dentin. The optical properties of a composite resin
Other composites are composed of comprising different transparent base
composite resins that have translucency, monomers and filler particles are
opacity, and chromaticity values similar to characterized by the differences in the
those of natural dental enamel. There are optical properties of the resin matrix and
also composite resins referred to as enamel the filler particles. Furthermore, the filler
or incisal composites that have higher than causes changes in the physical
normal translucencies for matching the characteristics of light transmittance that
high translucency areas in restorations.20-23 influenced the color of resin
In the present study, the Filtek Ultimate composites.27,28 The fact that the Estenia
Enamel composite, an enamel composite, C&B indirect composite, which is a hybrid
exhibited one of the highest light composite, exhibited the lowest light
transmission values. The other enamel transmission values at both thicknesses can
composite, the Aelita Aesthetic Enamel, be attributed to the higher percentage of
was found to have a relatively low light ceramic microfillers (92 wt%) with a
transmission value, but its light particle size of 2 μm.
transmission was still greater than that of
the Aelite All-Purpose Body and Aelite LS The depth of cure of a composite resin is
Posterior materials, which are made by the affected by the amount of light that reaches
same company. The IPS Empress Direct the photoinitiator. The intensity of the light
Dentin composite exhibited a very low decreases as it passes through the material.
light transmission value, below those of Fillers and pigments strongly influence the
materials in the enamel composite group. intensity of the incident light, limiting the
Friebel et al.(24) recommended the use of a depth of cure.29 Furthermore, as
dentin composite for front teeth in order to emphasized by Vichi et al.,30 thickness is a
mask the dark background of the oral crucial factor affecting the final aesthetic
cavity. They also suggested the inclusion result. Thus, to achieve the effective
of a 1–2 mm translucent edge at the crown reproduction of the aesthetic aspects of
of the tooth using a layering technique with natural teeth, texture, thickness, opacity,
translucent enamel shades in order to make and translucency are important
the reconstruction appear more natural. characteristics that must be considered.
The present outcomes revealed that the
In recent years, nanomaterials have decrease in light transmission was
captured increasing attention because of dependent on the composite thickness,
their unique structures and properties.
201
Saridag, et al.: Light Transmission of Different Resin Composites at Different Thicknesses

confirming the tested hypothesis. Thus, the Ultimate Enamel and the indirect hybrid
thickness of the composite materials used composite Estenia C&B exhibited the
must be taken into consideration during highest and lowest light transmission
treatment in order to obtain the desired values, respectively.
light transmission.
Conflict of Interests
Some researchers have indicated that blue
light-curing units with a minimum power The authors declare that there is no conflict
irradiance of 300 mW/cm2 are effective for of interests regarding the publication of
the photoactivation of composite this paper.
materials.31-32.The ISO 4049 standard does
not have any standard for the minimum REFERENCES
light intensity for photoactivation, but does
recommend that manufacturers’ 1. Ruddell DE, Maloney MM,
instructions should be followed.31-33 The Thompson JY. Effect of novel filler
power irradiance of the light-curing unit particles on the mechanical and wear
used in the present study was 1200 properties of dental composites. Dent
mW/cm2, which is higher than the Mater 2002; 18: 72-80.
minimum indicated in previous studies. 2. Bayne SC, Heymann O, Swift JE.
Update on dental composite
This in vitro study on composite restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;
translucency may be limited due to lack of 125: 687-701.
clear clinical relevance. The esthetic 3. Kukrer D, Gemalmaz D, Kuybulu
appearance of the transluecency can be EO, Bozkurt FO. A prospective
altered by the thickness, color, surface clinical studyof ceromer inlays:
texture, adesiv and base material of results up to 53 months. Int J
composite resin restorations. Further Prosthodont 2004; 17: 17–23.
studies will be required to investigate the 4. Monaco C, Baldissara P,
variations in light transmission properties dall’Orologio GD, Scotti R. Short-
between resin composite and tooth term clinicalevaluation of inlay and
structure. onlay restorations made with a
ceromer. Int J Prosthodont 2002; 14:
CONCLUSION
81–6.
5. Zimmerli B, Strub M, Jeger F,
Based on the results of the present study, Stadler O, Lussi A. Composite
the following conclusions can be drawn: materials: composition, properties and
1. Light transmission was affected by the clinical applications. A literature
composite type, filler particles, volume, review. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed
and contents. 2010; 120: 972–86.
2. Light transmission through the 6. Chen MH. Update of dental
composite resins was significantly reduced nanocomposites. J Dent Res 2010;
as the specimen thickness increased as 89: 549-560.
measured using an LED polymerization 7. Ferracane J. Resin composite state of
unit. the art. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 29-38.
8. Kaizer MR, Oliveira-Ogliari A,
3. Among the composite resins Cenci MS, Opdam NJM, Moraes RR.
investigated the direct nanohybrid Filtek Do nanofill or submicron composites

202
Saridag, et al.: Light Transmission of Different Resin Composites at Different Thicknesses

show improved smoothness and composite. Dent Mater 2012; 28:

gloss? A systematic review of in 204-11.
vitro studies. Dental Mater 2014; 30: 17. Villarroel M, Fahl N, JR Sousa AM,
41–78. Batista O. Direct esthetic restorations
9. Jain V, Platt JA, Moore K, Spohr based on translucency and opacity of
AM, Borges GA. Color stability, composite resins. Esthet Restor Dent
gloss and surface roughness of 2011; 23: 73–88.
indirect composite resins. J Oral Sci 18. Chu SJ. Precision shade technology:
2013; 55: 9-15. contemporary strategies in shade
10. Sideridou ID, Karabela MM, selection. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent
Vouvoudi ECh. Physical properties 2002; 14(1): 79–83.
of current dental nanohybrid and 19. Gaintantzopoulou M, Kakaboura A,
nanofill light-cured resin composites. Vougiouklakis G. Colour stability of
Dent Mater 2011; 27: 598-602. tooth-coloured restorative materials.
11. Nica I, Cimpoesu N, Rusu V, J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2005; 3:
Andronache M, Stefanescu C. 51–6.
Stuctural properties of nanofilled and 20. Nakajima M, Arimoto A,
microfilled restorative composites. Prasansuttiporn T, Thanatvarakorn
Mater Plast 2012; 49(3): 176-180. O, Foxton RM, Tagami J. Light
12. Senawongse P, Pongprueksa P. transmission characteristics of dentine
Surface roughness of nanofill and and resin composites with different
nanohybrid resin composites after thickness. J Dent 2012; 40: 77-82.
polishing and brushing. J Esthet 21. Brodbellt RH, O’ Brien WJ, Fan PL.
Restor Dent 2007; 19: 265–75. Translucency of dental porcelains. J
13. Mitra SB, Wu D, Holmes BN. An Dent Res 1980; 59: 70-5.
application of nanotechnology in 22. Fahl N, Denehy GE, Jackson RD.
advanced dental materials. J Am Protocol for predictable restoration
Dent Assoc 2003; 134: 1382–90. of anterior teeth with composite
14. Rastelli AN, Jacomassi DP, Faloni resins. Pract Periodontics Aesthet
AP, Queiroz TP, Rojas SS, Bernardi Dent 1995; 7(8): 13–22.
MI, Bagnato VS, Hernandes AC. The 23. Fahl N, Jr. A. Polychromatic
filler content of the dental composite composite layering approach for
resins and their influence on different solving a complex class IV/direct
properties. Microsc Res Tech 2012; veneer-diastema combination: part I.
75(6): 758-65. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2006;
15. Arimoto A, Nakajima M, Hosaka K, 18(10): 641–5.
Nishimura K, Ikeda M, Foxton RM, 24. Friebel M, Pernell O, Cappius HJ,
Tagami J. Translucency, opalescence Helfmann J, Meinke MC. Simulation
and light transmission characteristics of color perception of layered dental
of light-cured resin composites. Dent composites using optical properties
Mater 2010; 26: 1090-7. to evaluate the benefit of esthetic
16. Horie K, Nakajima M, Hosaka K, layer preparation technique. Dent
Kainose K, Tanaka A, Foxton RM, Mater 2012; 28: 424‑32.
Tagami J. Influence of composite– 25. Wei Wang, Liao S, Zhu Y, Liu M,
composite join on light transmission Zhao Q, Fu Y. Recent applications of
characteristics of layered resin nanomaterials in prosthodontics, J

203
Saridag, et al.: Light Transmission of Different Resin Composites at Different Thicknesses

Nanomater 2015; 501: 1-11. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 1584‑9.

26. Frauscher KE, Ilie N. Depth of cure 31. El-Mowafy OM, El-Badrawy WA,
and mechanical properties of nano- Lewis DW, et al. Intensity of quartz-
hybrid resin-based composites with tungsten-halogen light-curing units
novel and conventional matrix used in private practice in Toronto. J
formulation. Clin Oral Invest 2012; Am Dent Assoc 2005; 136: 766-773.
16: 1425-34. 32. Santos Jr GC, Coelho Santos MJM,
27. Arikawa H, Kanie T, Fujii K, El-Mowafy OM, El-Badrawy W.
Takahashi H, Ban S. Effect of filler Light intensity of quartz-tungsten-
properties in composite resins on halogen light polymerization units
light transmittance characteristics used in dental offices in Brazil. Int J
and color. Dent Mater J 2007; 26: Prosthodont 2005; 18(5): 151-152.
38-44. 33. de Paula AB, Tango RN, Sinhoreti
28. Homma T, Ariyama Y, Kondo H, MA, Alves MC, Puppin-Rontani
Sakamoto M, Kanegae S, Itoh M, RM. Effect of thickness of indirect
Yamaguchi M, Takahashi H. Optical restoration and distance from the
properties of fluorinated silicon light-curing unit tip on the hardness
oxide and organic spin-on-glass films of a dual-cured resin cement. Braz
for thin-film optical wave guides. J Dent J 2010; 21: 117-122.
Electrochemical Sci 2000; 147:
1141-44.
29. Howard B, Wilson ND, Newman
SM, Pfeifer CS, Stansbury JW.
Relationships between conversion,
temperature and optical properties
during composite photopolymerization.
Acta Biomater 2010; 6(6): 2053-9.
30. Vichi A, Fraioli A, Davidson CL,
Ferrari M. Influence of thickness on
color in multi‑layering technique.

204