Spiro Megremis

Comparison of an absolute and surrogate measure of relative translucency in dental ceramics

PURPOSE The objective was to compare absolute translucency with a frequently used surrogate measure of relative translucency (contrast ratio) from 14 all-ceramic materials having a wide range of translucencies. MATERIALS AND METHODS Standardized disks were fabricated from fourteen ceramics, varying both thickness (0. 3mm, 0.5 mm, 1.0 mm, and 1.5 mm) and chroma (high and low). Absolute translucency (percent transmission) was measured using a spectroradiometer with an integrating sphere. Relative translucency was measured using a spectrophotometer as contrast ratio (contrast ratio; ratio of L* values recorded on black and white backgrounds). Non-linear regression was used to compare measurements of absolute versus relative values for each of the spectrophotometers. RESULTS Contrast ratio was not able to characterize translucency across the range of materials studied and became less sensitive with increasing opacity. A non-linear correlation was found between percent transmission and contrast ratio down to 50% transmission (r(2)=0.97) and contrast ratio was insensitive to transmission differences below 50% transmission. CONCLUSION Contrast ratio is not a direct measure of translucency and cannot be used below 50% transmission.

Comparison of the transformation temperatures of heat-activated Nickel-Titanium orthodontic archwires by two different techniques.

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to investigate the suitability of the Bend and Free Recovery (BFR) method as a standard test method to determine the transformation temperatures of heat-activated Ni-Ti orthodontic archwires. This was done by determining the transformation temperatures of two brands of heat-activated Ni-Ti orthodontic archwires using the both the BFR method and the standard method of Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC). The values obtained from the two methods were compared with each other and to the manufacturer-listed values. METHODS Forty heat-activated Ni-Ti archwires from both Rocky Mountain Orthodontics (RMO) and Opal Orthodontics (Opal) were tested using BFR and DSC. Round (0.016 inches) and rectangular (0.019×0.025 inches) archwires from each manufacturer were tested. The austenite start temperatures (As) and austenite finish temperatures (Af) were recorded. RESULTS For four of the eight test groups, the BFR method resulted in lower standard deviations than the DSC method, and, overall, the average standard deviation for BFR testing was slightly lower than for DSC testing. Statistically significant differences were seen between the transformation temperatures obtained from the BFR and DSC test methods. However, the Af temperatures obtained from the two methods were remarkably similar with the mean differences ranging from 0.0 to 2.1°C: Af Opal round (BFR 26.7°C, DSC 27.6°C) and rectangular (BFR 27.6°C, DSC 28.6°C); Af RMO round (BFR 25.5°C, DSC 25.5°C) and rectangular (BFR 28.0°C, DSC 25.9°C). Significant differences were observed between the manufacturer-listed transformation temperatures and those obtained with BFR and DSC testing for both manufacturers. SIGNIFICANCE The results of this study suggest that the Bend and Free Recovery method is suitable as a standard method to evaluate the transformation temperatures of heat-activated Ni-Ti orthodontic archwires.

An ada laboratory evaluation of light-emitting diode curing units.

December 3, 2014): online at jada.ada.org (this information is current as of The following resources related to this article are available http://jada.ada.org/content/145/11/1164 can be found in the online version of this article at: including high-resolution figures, Updated information and services http://jada.ada.org/content/145/11/1164/#BIBL , 0 of which can be accessed free: 2 articles This article cites http://www.ada.org/990.aspx at: permission to reproduce this article in whole or in part can be found of this article or about reprints Information about obtaining

Degree of conversion and cross‐link density within a resin‐matrix composite

The aims of this study were to profile light radiated from two light-curing units (LCUs) and evaluate profile relationship to polymerization patterns within a resin-matrix composite (RMC). Beam profiles of one multiple emission peak light-emitting-diode and one quartz-tungsten-halogen curing-unit were measured using a beam profiler/spectrometer system. A camera-based profiler and an integrating sphere/spectrometer assembly were used to evaluate each LCU beam. Polymerization patterns within a nano-hybrid RMC were investigated using a mapping approach by assessing the degree of conversion utilizing micro-Raman spectroscopy and indirectly estimating cross-link-density by repeated microhardness testing before and after exposure to ethanol (%KH reduction, n = 3). The irradiance received on the top and bottom specimen surfaces from both LCUs was measured using a MARC-RC system. The investigated beam profile area from both LCUs was non-uniform and yielded localized discrepancies in DC (55.7-74.9%) and %KH reduction (26.7-54.1%). The LCU irradiance received at the bottom of the specimens was ∼10% of the top value. This study demonstrated that LCU beam profiles were non-uniform in the area explored. Localized differences in DC and %KH reduction existed throughout the RMC specimens but did not follow a specific pattern.

Long-term effects of seven cleaning methods on light transmittance, surface roughness, and flexural modulus of polyurethane retainer material

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the long-term effects of seven different cleaning methods on light transmittance, surface roughness, and flexural modulus of a polyurethane retainer material. MATERIALS AND METHODS Polyurethane retainer specimens (Vivera®, Align Technology Inc) (70 specimens, n = 10 per method, 50.8 mm × 12.7 mm × 1.0 mm) were exposed to seven cleaning methods twice a week for 6 months. Before treatment and after 6 months, light transmittance, surface roughness, and flexural modulus of the specimens were quantified. Qualitative assessment of randomly selected specimens from each solution was performed at baseline and after 6 months using a scanning electron microscope. Statistical analyses were performed at the .05 significance level. RESULTS Of the three test variables, light transmittance through the specimens was the only one that changed significantly from baseline to 6 months for all cleaning solutions, with all of them causing a decrease. However, except for 0.6% sodium hypochlorite showing a change in surface roughness values and 2.5% vinegar and toothbrushing showing an increase in flexural modulus, none of the other four cleaning methods resulted in significant changes in surface roughness or flexural modulus values for the polyurethane specimens between baseline and after 6 months. CONCLUSIONS Of the seven cleaning methods, Invisalign® cleaning crystals, Polident®, and Listerine® showed the least amount of change in light transmittance values for the polyurethane specimens over 6 months, and they had no effect on surface roughness and flexural modulus values.

Long-term effects of different cleaning methods on copolyester retainer properties

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate light transmittance, surface roughness, and flexural modulus of copolyester retainer material after long-term exposure to different cleaning methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized copolyester retainer specimens (ACE) were subjected to seven chemical cleaning solutions for 6 months: Invisalign cleaning crystals, Retainer Brite, Polident, Listerine mouthwash, 2.5% acetic acid, 0.6% NaClO, and 3% H2O2. Seventy specimens (n = 10 per method, 50.8 mm × 12.7 mm × 1.0 mm) were exposed to the different solutions twice a week for 2 minutes or according to manufacturers instructions and stored in artificial saliva at 37°C. Another group of specimens (n = 10) was brushed with a standardized toothbrushing machine for 2 minutes twice a week. At baseline and 6 months, light transmittance, surface roughness and flexural modulus of the specimens were quantified using spectrophotometry, profilometry, and three-point bend testing, respectively. Qualitative assessment was performed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical analyses were accomplished at a significance level of .05. RESULTS: The results indicated that light transmittance through the specimens decreased significantly from baseline for all cleaning methods at 6 months. Flexural modulus of the specimens decreased significantly for all cleaning methods except Invisalign crystals and Retainer Brite ( P > .05). The Listerine group demonstrated the worst light transmittance change while H2O2 demonstrated the greatest change in flexural modulus of the specimens compared with other cleaning methods; however, no qualitative difference was observed using SEM analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that different cleaning methods affect long-term physical properties of the ACE retainer material. At the present time, none of these cleaning methods is ideal for copolyester retainer material.