The aim was to investigate the effects of different post-curing units on the chemical properties (degree of conversion) of 3D-printed resins for producing models in dentistry. The goal is to determine whether less-expensive post-curing units can be a viable alternative to the manufacturer’s recommended units. Forty-five samples were fabricated with an LCD printer (Phrozen Sonic Mini, Phrozen 3D, Hsinchu City, Taiwan) using MSLA Dental Modeling Resin (Apply Lab Work, Torrance, CA, USA). These samples were divided randomly into four different groups for post-curing using four distinct curing units: Phrozen Cure V2 (Phrozen 3D, Hsinchu City, Taiwan), a commercial acrylic nail UV LED curing unit (SUNUV, Shenzhen, China), a homemade curing unit created from a readily available UV LED light produced (Shenzhen, China), and the Triad^® 2000™ tungsten halogen light source (Dentsply Sirona, York, PA, USA). The degree of conversion was measured with FTIR spectroscopy using a Nicolet 6700 FTIR Spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Phrozen Cure V2 had the highest overall mean degree of conversion (69.6% with a 45 min curing time). The Triad^® 2000 VLC Curing Unit had the lowest mean degree of conversion value at the 15 min interval (66.2%) and the lowest mean degree of conversion at the 45 min interval with the homemade curing unit (68.2%). The type of light-curing unit did not yield statistically significant differences in the degree of conversion values. There was a statistically significant difference in the degree of conversion values between the 15 min and 45 min curing intervals. When comparing individual light-curing units, there was a statistically significant difference in the degree of conversion for the post-curing units between the 15 min and 45 min curing time (p = 0.029).

This study investigated the effect of the oxygen-inhibited layer on the degree of conversion (DC) of three dental adhesives, comparing two different protocols. Quartz–tungsten–halogen (QTH) light curing and light-emitting diode (LED) were used to cure three adhesives: OptiBond All in One (OAIO), Adper Easy Bond (AEB) and ExciteF (EXF). The DC was calculated utilizing Fourier Transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) (n = 12). The two protocols used were as follows: (i) prevent the oxygen-inhibited layer using a Mylar plastic strip pushed onto each bonding adhesive; and (ii) polymerize samples without a plastic strip. The data was analyzed statistically by a three-way ANOVA, and Tukey Test (a = 0.05). The presence of an oxygen-inhibited layer reduced the DC of the adhesives by 64% for EXF, 46% for AEB and 32% for OAIO. This study suggests that there are differences among the oxygen-inhibited layers present for the adhesives tested.

This study examined whether the degree of abutment surface modification that may occur with regular periodontal instrumentation has a clinical impact in terms of increased plaque accumulation and increased peri-implant tissue inflammation on zirconia implant abutments. Thirteen patients who had zirconia implant crowns were recruited in this randomized clinical trial. Each patient acted as their control and had either the buccal or lingual surface of their screw-retained implant restoration scaled with a metallic scaler and the other surface with a non-metallic scaler at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Cytokine testing of the peri-implant crevicular fluid was completed at 0, 3, and 12 months for IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, TNF-α, or IFNγ. Implant crowns were removed at 12 months and evaluated under an atomic force microscope for the average roughness (Ra). The implant crowns were polished and re-inserted. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and post hoc tests were conducted with a significance level of α = 0.05. Significant differences in surface roughness (Ra) were observed between the metallic and non-metallic scalers. The median Ra values were 274.0 nm for metallic scalers and 147.1 nm for non-metallic scalers. However, there were no significant differences between the type of scaler used and the amount of clinical inflammation or cytokine production. Metallic scalers produced deeper, more aggressive surface alterations to the abutment/crown zirconia surface, but there was no statistically significant difference between the degree of surface alterations, amount of BOP, and the amplitude of cytokine inflammation produced.