The effect of post-cure heat treatment systems

on composite resin restorations

RS Weiner
J Am Dent Assoc 1997;128;88

The following resources related to this article are available online at

jada.ada.org ( this information is current as of April 13, 2011 ):

Information about obtaining reprints of this article or about permission to reproduce

this article in whole or in part can be found at:
http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/pubs/jada/permissions.asp

Downloaded from jada.ada.org on April 13, 2011

© 2011 American Dental Association. The sponsor and its products are not endorsed by the ADA.
 _
THE EFFECT OF
.POST-CURE HEAT
.TREATMENT SYSTEMS
ON COMPOSITE RESIN
RESTORATIONS
RANDY S. WEINER, DM
M ost dental patients ex-
press an interest in the
type of care they receive.
With increasing frequency, pa-
tients express concern about how
their teeth will be restored, and
what materials will be used to
accomplish the restoration.
Research in esthetic dentistry,
often conducted by dental mate-
rials manufacturers, focuses on
new techniques and materials to
increase the clinician's ability to
provide cosmetic dental treat-
ment. As a result, the dental
community is observing an in-
crease in the use of composite
resm restorations in posterior
teeth. However, direct-filled com-
posite resin restorations harbor
some inherent problems: proxi-
mal contact difficulties, mi-
croleakage and postoperative
sensitivity.
Composite resin inlays over-
come some of the problems en-
countered with direct-placement
techniques. A number of manu-
facturers of dental materials
market systems to produce these
inlays, each claiming superiority
of their product over those of the
others.
Each of the commercially
available composite resin inlay
systems subject the composite
resin to a temperature of approx-
88 JADA, Vol. 128, January 1997
D.
imately 250 F for about 7 to 10
minutes. One inlay system
places the composite under pres-
sure of 85 pounds per square
inch concurrently with the heat
treatment. The cost of these sys-
tems ranges from $700 to $3,000.
I participated in a research
team that formulated a study to
better assess clinicians' options
in selecting the appropriate sys-
tem. We examined the effect of
Composite resin
inlays overcome
some of the problems
encountered with
direct-placement
techniques.
various post-cure heat treatment
systems on composite resin
restorations.
The researchers, all members
of the clinical faculty at Tufts
University School of Dental
Medicine in Boston, fabricated 44
uniform composite resin cyin-
ders using Tetric composite resin
(Ivoclar North America) and di-
vided the samples into four
groups of 11 each. Samples in
groups I through III were heat-
treated using a DI 500 oven
(Coltene/Whaledent), the Con-
cept (Ivoclar North America)
oven and a conventional toaster
oven (for 7 min. at 250 F, using
an independent thermometer),
respectively. Samples in Group
IV, the control batch, were light-
cured only, not heat-treated.
After heat treatment, 10 com-
posite resin cylinders from each
group were tested for hardness
(machine 4202, Instron). No sta-
tistically significant differences
between the groups existed, al-
Downloaded from jada.ada.org on April 13, 2011
though the control group was not
as hard as the three test groups.
Researchers used the remaining
four composite resin cylinders to
assess color stability. Each was
coded and evaluated by 50 facul-
ty members at Tufts University
dental school. Chi-square analy-
sis showed no statistically signif-
icant differences in color between
the groups.
From this investigation, we
drew two conclusions:
- Heat, not the light from the
heat source, emerges as the im-
portant medium in tempering
composite resin.
- Comparability exists between
the use of an inexpensive toaster
oven in the processing of heat-
treated composite resin, and the
use of expensive processing sys-
tems. Practitioners can pass
these cost savings on to their pa-
tients. This offers clinicians a
cost-effective alternative to com-
mercially available heat-treat-
ment systems. .
The author wishes to thank Drs. Gerard
Kugel and Mavis Champion for their help in
this study.
Dr. Weiner is an assistant clinical professor,
Division of Operative Dentistry, Department
of Restorative Dentistry, Tufts University
School of Dental Medicine, Boston. He also
has a private practice. Address reprint re-
quests to Dr. Weiner at 840 Main St., Suite
204, Millis, Mass. 02054.