d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 8 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 521–528

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

journal homepage: www.intl.elsevierhealth.com/journals/dema

Depth of cure of resin composites: Is the ISO 4049 method

suitable for bulk fill materials?

Simon Flury a,∗ , Stefanie Hayoz b , Anne Peutzfeldt a , Jürg Hüsler b , Adrian Lussi a
a Department of Preventive, Restorative and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Switzerland
b Institute of Mathematical Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Bern, Switzerland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Objectives. To evaluate if depth of cure DISO determined by the ISO 4049 method is accurately
Received 6 October 2011 reflected with bulk fill materials when compared to depth of cure Dnew determined by Vickers
Received in revised form microhardness profiles.
7 February 2012 Methods. DISO was determined according to “ISO 4049; Depth of cure” and resin composite
Accepted 7 February 2012 specimens (n = 6 per group) were prepared of two control materials (Filtek Supreme Plus,
Filtek Silorane) and four bulk fill materials (Surefil SDR, Venus Bulk Fill, Quixfil, Tetric Evo-
Ceram Bulk Fill) and light-cured for either 10 s or 20 s. For Dnew , a mold was filled with one
Keywords: of the six resin composites and light-cured for either 10 s or 20 s (n = 22 per group). The mold
Increment was placed under a microhardness indentation device and hardness measurements (Vickers
Light-curing time hardness, VHN) were made at defined distances, beginning at the resin composite that had
Restorative been closest to the light-curing unit (i.e. at the “top”) and proceeding toward the uncured
resin composite (i.e. toward the “bottom”). On the basis of the VHN measurements, Vickers
hardness profiles were generated for each group.
Results. DISO varied between 1.76 and 6.49 mm with the bulk fill materials showing the highest
DISO . Dnew varied between 0.2 and 4.0 mm. Dnew was smaller than DISO for all resin composites
except Filtek Silorane.
Conclusions. For bulk fill materials the ISO 4049 method overestimated depth of cure com-
pared to depth of cure determined by Vickers hardness profiles.
© 2012 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

light-curing resin composites, it has therefore been regarded

1. Introduction as the gold standard to apply and cure the resin composite
in increments of limited thickness. The maximal increment
Energy of the light emitted from a light-curing unit decreases
thickness has been generally defined as 2 mm [6,7]. However,
drastically when transmitted through resin composite [1],
restoring cavities, especially deep ones, with resin composite
leading to a gradual decrease in degree of conversion of the
increments of 2 mm thickness is time-consuming and implies
resin composite material at increasing distance from the irra-
a risk of incorporating air bubbles or contaminations between
diated surface. Decreases in degree of conversion compromise
the increments. Thus, various manufacturers have recently
physical properties and increase elution of monomer [2–5] and
introduced new types of resin composites, so-called “bulk fill”
thus may lead to premature failure of a restoration or may
materials, which are claimed to be curable to a maximal incre-
negatively affect the pulp tissue. When restoring cavities with
ment thickness of 4 mm [8–11].

∗
Corresponding author at: Freiburgstrasse 7, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland. Tel.: +41 316322581; fax: +41 316329875.
E-mail address: simon.flury@zmk.unibe.ch (S. Flury).
0109-5641/$ – see front matter © 2012 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.dental.2012.02.002

Descargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Pontifical Xavierian University de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en septiembre 18, 2019.
Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2019. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
522 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 8 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 521–528
A method for defining the maximal increment thickness
of resin composites has been introduced by the International
Organization for Standardization ISO in the second edition
of ISO 4049 in the year 1988 [12]. The method is officially
denominated as “ISO 4049; Depth of cure”, and according to
the method the resin composite to be tested is filled in a
tube-shaped mold, light-cured, pushed out of the mold, and
uncured resin composite material is then removed (“scraped
away”) with a spatula leaving a hard cylindrical specimen.
Finally, the absolute length of this hard specimen is mea-
sured and divided by two. The resulting value is recorded as
the depth of cure and defines the maximum increment thick-
ness. The rationale for the division factor two is that not all
the hardened specimen is actually optimally cured [2,13,14].
The ISO 4049 method was developed using a microfilled resin
composite (Durafill, Kulzer & Co GmbH, Bad Homburg, West
Germany) [15], one of the first visible light-curing resin com-
posites. Ever since, the principle of the ISO 4049 method has
basically remained the same [16].
Resin composites, however, have undergone continuous
development through the years as regards their various com-
ponents, e.g. the filler and the initiator. It seems likely that
the new bulk fill materials have required certain changes or
modifications in the composition, and it is therefore relevant
to verify the accuracy of the ISO 4049 method and its division
factor.
Since hardness measurement has been shown to be a prac-
tical method to indirectly determine degree of conversion for
a given resin composite [14,17–20], hardness profiles can be
used to alternatively measure depth of cure. Consequently,
the aim of this study was to evaluate if depth of cure deter-
mined by the ISO 4049 method is accurately reflected with bulk
fill materials when compared to depth of cure determined by
Vickers hardness profiles. In order to arrive at this aim sev-
eral subaims were set: (1) to determine the depth of cure by
ISO 4049, (2) to measure Vickers hardness at increasing dis-
tances from the light-curing source, (3) to determine at which
depth 80% of the maximum Vickers hardness was obtained,
and (4) to determine which division factor should be used to
arrive at this “80% of maximum Vickers hardness” depth. The
overall hypothesis to be tested was that the ISO 4049 method
accurately reflects the depth of cure determined by Vickers
hardness estimations of the degree of conversion.
2. Materials and methods
Six resin composites (Table 1) were used for investigating the
accuracy of the ISO 4049 method: Two control materials (Fil-
tek Supreme Plus and Filtek Silorane), two flowable bulk fill
materials (Surefil SDR and Venus Bulk Fill), and two high-
viscosity bulk fill materials (Quixfil and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk
Fill). All light-curing was performed with an LED light-curing
unit (Demi, Kerr Corporation, Middleton, WI, USA) and light
power density was verified to be at least 1000 mW/cm2 at the
beginning and end of each day of specimen preparation with
a radiometer (Demetron L.E.D. Radiometer, Kerr Corporation).
Descargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Pontifical Xavierian University de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en septiembre 18, 2019.
Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2019. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
2.1. Depth of cure by ISO 4049
Depth of cure by ISO 4049 was performed with re-usable stain-
less steel molds according to ISO 4049:2000 [16]. Pretests had
found the absolute length of cylindrical specimens of the
cured resin composite to vary between 3.5 and 13 mm depend-
ing on the resin composite. The ISO 4049 method states that
the stainless steel molds shall be at least 2 mm longer than the
absolute length of the cylindrical specimens. Thus, stainless
steel molds of 6 mm, 9 mm, or 15 mm in length and an internal
diameter of 4 mm were custom-made.
Depending on the resin composite, the mold of either
6 mm, 9 mm, or 15 mm in length was placed on a glass slide
covered by a Mylar strip (Hawe Stopstrip Straight, KerrHawe,
Bioggio, Switzerland). The mold was then filled in bulk with
one of the six resin composites. The top side of the mold was
covered with a second Mylar strip and the resin material made
flush with the mold by use of a second glass slide. The mold
was placed on white filter paper (Filter Paper Circles 589/1,
Schleicher & Schuell MicroScience GmbH, Dassel, Germany).
The second glass slide was removed and the resin compos-
ite was light-cured for either 10 s or 20 s keeping the light tip
centered and in contact with the second Mylar strip. After
light-curing, the cylindrical specimens were pushed out of the
mold and the uncured resin composite material was removed
with a plastic spatula. The absolute length of the cylindrical
specimens of cured resin composite was then measured with a
digital caliper of ±0.01 mm accuracy (Mitutoyo IP 65, Kawasaki,
Japan). The absolute length (AL) was divided by two and the
latter value recorded as DISO . Six specimens were made in each
of the 12 groups (i.e. six materials light-cured for either 10 s or
20 s).
2.2. Depth of cure by Vickers hardness profiles
Depth of cure by Vickers hardness profiles was performed in
a re-usable, block-shaped, and custom-made stainless steel
mold with a semicircular notch of 15 mm in length and 4 mm
in diameter (Fig. 1A). The semicircular notch was entirely filled
with one of the six resin composites. Then, the mold was cov-
ered with a Mylar strip (Hawe Stopstrip Straight, KerrHawe)
and the resin composite was made flush with the mold by
use of a glass slide. Excess resin material was removed and
the mold was covered by a stainless steel shell (Fig. 1B). A
second Mylar strip was placed on the semicircular opening
(Fig. 1C) and the resin composite was light-cured through
the semicircular opening (top surface) for 10 s or 20 s keeping
the light tip centered and in contact with the second Mylar
strip. After light-curing, the shell and both Mylar strips were
removed (Fig. 1D) and the mold including the resin compos-
ite specimen was placed under a microhardness indentation
device (Fischerscope HM2000, Helmut Fischer GmbH, Sin-
delfingen, Germany). Subsequently, hardness measurements
(Vickers hardness, VHN) were made on the resin compos-
ite specimen at defined distances, beginning with the resin
composite which had been closest to the light tip (i.e. from
the “top”) and moving toward the uncured resin composite
(i.e. toward the “bottom”) until VHN of the resin compos-
ite could not be measured anymore due to its softness. The
defined distances (ı) were: 0.1 mm, 0.2 mm, 0.5 mm, 1.0 mm,
 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 8 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 521–528 523

Table 1 – Resin composites used.

Resin composite Type of resin composite Maximum increment Shade LOT-number
(according to thickness (mm) (according
manufacturer) to manufacturer)
Filtek Supreme Plus Universal restorative 2 A3 N116619
3 M ESPE, St. Paul,
MN, USA
Filtek Silorane Low shrink posterior 2.5 A3 N138530
3 M ESPE, St. Paul, restorative
MN, USA
Surefil SDR Posterior bulk fill flowable base 4 Universal 100128
Dentsply Caulk,
Milford, DE, USA
Venus Bulk Fill Low stress flowable composite 4 Universal 010030
Heraeus Kulzer,
Hanau, Germany
Quixfil Posterior restorative 4 Universal 1007001127
Dentsply DeTrey,
Constance,
Germany
Tetric EvoCeram Moldable posterior composite 4 IVA IDS
Bulk Fill for bulk-filling technique (reddish universal
Ivoclar Vivadent, shade)
Schaan,
Liechtenstein

1.5 mm, 2.0 mm, 2.5 mm, 3.0 mm, 3.5 mm, 4.0 mm, 4.5 mm,
5.0 mm, 6.0 mm, 7.0 mm, 8.0 mm, 9.0 mm, 10.0 mm, 11.0 mm,
12.0 mm, and 13.0 mm. Programming of the hardness indenta-
tion device for defined distances and reproducible placement
of the mold ensured that the VHN measurements were made
along the same axis on each specimen. VHN measurements
were made at a load of 3 g for 15 s. For each of the 12 groups (i.e.
six materials light-cured for either 10 s or 20 s), 22 specimens
were prepared and thus 22 VHN measurements were made at
each of the defined distances.
2.3. Statistical analysis
In each of the 12 groups, the maximum VHNmax of the VHN val-
ues obtained at the defined distances ı = {0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5,
2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0, 10.0, 11.0, 12.0, 13.0}
was identified for each of the 22 specimens. For each group,
max
the median VHN  of the 22 VHNmax values as well as the
median D̃ ISO of the six DISO values was derived. Then the VHN
value VHN ISO at the biggest depth that was equal to or smaller
than D̃ISO was determined (Fig. 2). To assess which percentage

Fig. 1 – Specimen preparation for depth of cure determination by Vickers hardness measurements. A = stainless steel mold
with semicircular notch, B = stainless steel shell, C = semicircular opening for light-curing, and D = mold including the resin
composite specimen.

Descargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Pontifical Xavierian University de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en septiembre 18, 2019.
Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2019. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
524 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 8 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 521–528

[4.58,11.44]
[3.32,33.20]

[8.15,67.26]
Table 2 – Median and 95% bootstrap confidence interval for DISO (depth of cure determined by the ISO 4049 method), VHNmax (maximum of the VHN values obtained at

[3.91,6.57]
[1.07,2.06]
[1.03,6.89]
[3.16,3.25]

[3.04,4.24]
[1.83,2.57]
[3.49,4.86]
[2.73,3.28]
[2.84,4.48]
was attained), and fnew (the factor by

95% CI
fnew n = 22

Median
4.72
1.76
4.33
3.21
5.72
4.43

3.57
2.09
3.94
3.04
3.71
38.25
[0.54,1.26]
[1.87,2.16]
[1.55,2.54]
[2.98,3.02]
[1.07,2.35]
[0.23,1.77]

[1.09,1.74]
[1.53,2.51]
[2.31,2.71]
[3.80,4.16]
[2.87,4.60]
[0.10,1.50]
95% CI
Dnew (mm) n = 22

Nmiss
max

0
0
3
2
0
9

1
0
3
1
0
5
).
attained at D̃ISO ), Dnew (the biggest depth above which at least 80% of VHN

new

Median
which the absolute length of specimens, as determined by the ISO 4049 method, should be divided in order to arrive at D
Fig. 2 – Schematic depiction of the identification of VHNmax

1.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
1.5

1.5
2.0
2.5
4.0
3.5
0.2
and VHNISO (the VHN value at the biggest depth that was
equal to or smaller than D̃ISO ) as well as the calculation of
max

[51.57,65.33]
[83.05,91.10]
[27.32,46.01]
[42.21,47.83]
[23.62,30.21]
[29.32,50.15]

[52.16,61.27]
[76.35,91.77]
[40.43,50.30]
[34.58,36.88]
[28.50,34.71]
[36.75,52.73]
Dnew (the depth above which at least 80% of VHN  was

95% CI
attained).

pISO (%) n = 6
max

pISO of VHN was attained at D̃ISO , VHNISO was divided by

Median
max

VHN . The biggest depth Dnew , above which at least 80% of

62.7
84.7
44.2
46.0
25.6
40.8

60.7
83.3
46.5
36.0
32.5
51.5
max

VHN was attained, and the factor fnew , by which the abso-
lute length should be divided in order to arrive at Dnew , was
[51.74,65.10]
[54.40,61.08]
[14.34,16.72]

[57.57,67.10]
[39.87,62.19]

[61.83,73.60]
[52.01,59.10]
[15.23,19.94]
[12.61,13.49]
[64.81,75.15]
[35.03,65.88]
calculated for each specimen. For certain specimens VHN was

[8.84,10.00]
max
95% CI

never above 80% of VHN . For these specimens Dnew and

VHNmax n = 22

fnew could not be calculated and the number of such incalcu-

lable cases was called Nmiss . For DISO , VHNmax , pISO , Dnew and
fnew medians and 95% bootstrap confidence intervals for the
Median

medians were determined for each of the 12 groups.

59.45
58.40
15.60
9.45
62.20
48.55

68.50
55.95
17.65
13.05
70.10
51.95
All calculations were performed with R version 2.13.0
(The R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria;
www.R-project.org), using descriptive methods.
[2.32,2.40]
[1.70,1.80]
[4.28,4.37]
[4.76,4.86]
[5.69,5.76]
[3.29,3.35]

[2.60,2.74]
[2.05,2.13]
[4.89,4.97]
[6.02,6.12]
[6.41,6.60]
[3.73,3.89]
95% CI
DISO (mm) n = 6

3. Results
max

The Vickers hardness profiles for the 22 individual specimens

Median
the defined distances), pISO (percentage of VHN


of each of the six resin materials and the two light-curing

2.36
1.76
4.33
4.81
5.72
3.32

2.68
2.09
4.93
6.08
6.49
3.83

times are shown in Figs. 3 and 4. In Table 2 medians and

95% bootstrap confidence intervals for the medians are given
for DISO , VHNmax , pISO , Dnew and fnew for each of the six resin
Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill

Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill

composites and the two light-curing times.

Filtek Supreme Plus

Filtek Supreme Plus

The median D̃ISO of DISO for the six resin composites var-
Resin composite

ied between 1.76 and 6.49 mm, with the bulk fill materials
Venus Bulk Fill

Venus Bulk Fill

Filtek Silorane

Filtek Silorane

generally yielding higher D̃ISO than the control materials (Fil-

Surefil SDR

Surefil SDR

max
tek Supreme Plus and Filtek Silorane). The median VHN 
Quixfil

Quixfil

of VHNmax varied between 9.45 VHN and 70.10 VHN, with

the two flowable bulk fill materials (Surefil SDR and Venus
max

Bulk Fill) yielding the markedly lowest VHN . The percent-
max

Light-curing

age pISO of VHN attained at D̃ISO varied between 25.6%

and 84.7%, with the bulk fill materials retaining less than
max

50% of their VHN whereas Filtek Supreme Plus retained
10 s

20 s

around 60% and Filtek Silorane retained slightly more than

max

80% of their VHN . The biggest depth Dnew above which

Descargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Pontifical Xavierian University de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en septiembre 18, 2019.
Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2019. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 8 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 521–528 525

L of
Fig. 3 – Light-curing for 10 s: Vickers hardness profiles for each resin composite (n = 22 per resin composite). Medians A
absolute length, D̃ISO of depth of cure obtained by the ISO 4049 method, and new depth of cure Dnew for each resin
composite.

max

at least 80% of VHN was attained varied between 0.2 and
4 mm, with D̃ new being smaller than D̃ISO for all resin com-
posites except Filtek Silorane (Figs. 3 and 4). The factor fnew
by which the absolute length should be divided in order to
arrive at Dnew varied between 1.76 and 38.25, with fnew being
higher than the division factor two of the ISO 4049 method
for all resin composites except Filtek Silorane. Nmiss varied
between 0 and 9 with the high-viscosity bulk fill material Tetric
EvoCeram Bulk Fill displaying the highest number of incalcu-
lable cases.
4. Discussion
This study showed great variation between the six resin com-
posites as regards depth of cure DISO determined by the ISO
4049 method with the bulk fill materials, true to their name,

Descargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Pontifical Xavierian University de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en septiembre 18, 2019.
Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2019. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
526 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 8 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 521–528

L of
Fig. 4 – Light-curing for 20 s: Vickers hardness profiles for each resin composite (n = 22 per resin composite). Medians A
absolute length, D̃ISO of depth of cure obtained by the ISO 4049 method, and new depth of cure Dnew for each resin
composite.

yielding higher DISO than the two control materials. Possible
explanations for the higher DISO of the bulk fill materials are
more potent initiator systems and higher translucency. Nev-
ertheless, even with a light-curing time as short as 10 s all six
resin composites met the requirement stipulated in the ISO
4049:2000 of a DISO not less than 1.5 mm. ISO 4049:2000 addi-
tionally requires that the depth of cure shall be no more than
0.5 mm below the value claimed by the manufacturer when
using the recommended light-curing time. Only one resin
composite, at only one of the two light-curing times, did not

Descargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Pontifical Xavierian University de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en septiembre 18, 2019.
Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2019. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 8 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 521–528
meet this requirement: The manufacturer indicates that Tet-
ric EvoCeram Bulk Fill may be light-cured to a depth of 4 mm
using a light-curing time of 10 s provided that the light power
density is ≥1000 mW/cm2 . Yielding a DISO of 3.32 mm Tetric
EvoCeram Bulk Fill did not quite obtain the minimum DISO
required of 3.5 mm (i.e. 4.0 mm claimed by the manufacturer
minus 0.5 mm). As regards the influence of light-curing time,
doubling the time from 10 s to 20 s led to an average increase
in DISO of 17%. This increase is in agreement with the 16–23%
previously found as a result of doubling the light-curing time
[21,22].
The six resin composites also varied markedly regarding
Vickers hardness profiles. The hardness profiles of the four
bulk fill materials were wider than those of the control mate-
rials (as evidenced by the stretched-out hardness profiles)
indicating that the point at which VHN could not be measured
anymore due to softness occurred at a much bigger depth for
the bulk fill materials. It is noteworthy that this point at which
VHN could not be measured occurred at smaller depth than
the absolute length AL of the hardened resin composite spec-
imens determined by the ISO 4049 method (Figs. 3 and 4) for
all resin composites except Filtek Silorane. This discrepancy
may be the result of a limited resolution of the microhard-
ness indentation device at relatively low surface hardnesses.
The hardness profiles of the two flowable bulk fill materials
were flatter than those of the other materials indicating that
max

VHN of the two flowable bulk fill materials was markedly
lower. The inferior hardness can be explained by a lower filler
content necessary for obtaining the reduced viscosity. Fur-
thermore, regardless of resin composite and light-curing time,
most hardness profiles showed that VHNmax was not reached
at the very first measuring depth of 0.1 mm but rather in
subsurface areas at a depth of 0.2 mm to 1.0 mm. This phe-
nomenon has been previously described [23].
max

The percentage of VHN attained at the depth D̃ISO was
assessed and expressed as p . Whereas pISO was above 80%
ISO
for one of the control materials (Filtek Silorane), pISO was much
lower particularly for the bulk fill materials, which showed in
the median a pISO of only 40%, reflecting the different forms
of the Vickers hardness profiles.
Numerous studies have defined depth of cure based on
hardness measurements performed on the top and bottom
surface of a light-cured resin composite specimen. The hard-
ness values obtained were used to calculate a bottom/top
hardness ratio, and a ratio above 80% has often been used
as a minimum acceptable threshold value [14,24]. Analogi-
cally, in the present study a threshold of 80% was used in
order to determine a depth of cure based on the Vickers hard-
ness measurements: Thus, Dnew was defined as the depth
max
at which at least 80% of VHN  was obtained. Dnew varied
between 1 and 4 mm. There was, however, one exception in
that Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill yielded a Dnew of only 0.2 mm
when light-cured for 20 s. The reason for this very low value
is mainly that the hardness of a majority of Tetric EvoCeram
Bulk Fill specimens dropped drastically after the first mea-
suring depth (0.1 mm). Except for Filtek Silorane, the Dnew
values were lower than the DISO values indicating that the
ISO 4049 method overestimated the depth of cure, especially
for the bulk fill materials as already evidenced by the pISO
values. This finding is in corroboration with that of Moore
Descargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Pontifical Xavierian University de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en septiembre 18, 2019.
Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2019. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
527
and coworkers, who concluded that the ISO 4049 method
overestimated depth of cure compared with Knoop hardness
profiles [24].
The factors fnew by which the absolute length as deter-
mined by the ISO 4049 method should be divided in order
to arrive at Dnew were, consequently, higher than the factor
2 stipulated in the ISO 4049 method except for Filtek Silo-
rane. For the other resin composites, a division factor of 5 (in
the case of 10 s light-curing) or 4 (20 s light-curing) would be
more accurate. Again, the drastic drop in hardness after the
first measuring depth of 0.1 mm accounts for the exception-
ally high fnew calculated for Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill at 20 s
light-curing.
In seven of the 12 groups it happened for certain speci-
mens that none of the VHN values measured at the defined
max
distances were above 80% of the VHN  of that group, and
for these specimens Dnew and fnew could not be calculated.
The number of such incalculable cases Nmiss varied markedly
and was especially high for Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, which
led to a biased estimation of Dnew and fnew . On one hand when
light-cured for 10 s, nine specimens of Tetric EvoCeram Bulk
max
Fill showed no VHN value above 80% of VHN  and thus, Dnew
and f new remained similar to those of the other resin compos-
ites. On the other hand when light-cured for 20 s, for many
max
specimens only the first VHN value was above 80% of VHN  ,
leading to very low Dnew and thus very high fnew . It must be
mentioned, however, that the Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill used in
the present study was a preliminary material not yet intended
for in vivo use and not yet on the market at the time of the
measurements.
A recent study investigated depth of cure using numerous
measurement techniques and the authors concluded that not
only depth of cure measured similarly to the ISO 4049 method
but also Vickers hardness profiles overestimated depth of cure
[25]. This implies that in the present study hardness profiles
and the resultant Dnew also overestimated depth of cure. How-
ever, it should be noted that depth of cure determined on the
basis of hardness profiles was calculated differently in the two
studies: In the previous study, depth of cure was defined as the
depth at which at least 80% of the hardness measured on the
upper surface of the resin composite was obtained whereas in
the present study, depth of cure Dnew was defined as the depth
at which at least 80% of the maximum hardness (VHNmax ) was
obtained. As VHNmax was most often obtained in subsurface
areas and not at the upper surface, it is uncertain whether or
to what extent Dnew overestimated depth of cure.
5. Conclusion
The present study found that for bulk fill materials the ISO
4049 method overestimated depth of cure compared to the
determination by Vickers hardness estimations of the degree
of conversion.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest, real or perceived,
financial or nonfinancial.
528 d e n t a l m a t e r i a l s 2 8 ( 2 0 1 2 ) 521–528
references
[1] Price RB, Murphy DG, Dérand T. Light energy transmission
through cured resin composite and human dentin.
Quintessence Int 2000;31:659–67.
[2] Ruyter IE, Oysaed H. Conversion in different depths of
ultraviolet and visible light activated composite materials.
Acta Odontol Scand 1982;40:179–92.
[3] Ferracane JL, Mitchem JC, Condon JR, Todd R. Wear and
marginal breakdown of composites with various degrees of
cure. J Dent Res 1997;76:1508–16.
[4] Poskus LT, Placido E, Cardoso PE. Influence of placement
techniques on Vickers and Knoop hardness of class II
composite resin restorations. Dent Mater 2004;20:726–32.
[5] Sideridou ID, Achilias DS. Elution study of unreacted
Bis-GMA, TEGDMA, UDMA, and Bis-EMA from light-cured
dental resins and resin composites using HPLC. J Biomed
Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005;74:617–26.
[6] Sakaguchi RL, Douglas WH, Peters MC. Curing light
performance and polymerization of composite restorative
materials. J Dent 1992;20:183–8.
[7] Pilo R, Oelgiesser D, Cardash HS. A survey of output
intensity and potential for depth of cure among light-curing
units in clinical use. J Dent 1999;27:235–41.
[8] Quixfil Scientific Compendium. Dentsply DeTrey; 2003.
[9] Surefil SDR flow Directions For Use. Dentsply Caulk; 2009.
[10] Venus Bulk Fill Product Profile. Heraeus Kulzer; 2011.
[11] Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill Press Release. Ivoclar Vivadent;
2011.
[12] ISO 4049:1988 (2.). Dentistry—resin-based filling materials.
International Organization for Standardization; 1988.
[13] DeWald JP, Ferracane JL. A comparison of four modes of
evaluating depth of cure of light-activated composites. J
Dent Res 1987;66:727–30.
[14] Bouschlicher MR, Rueggeberg FA, Wilson BM. Correlation of
bottom-to-top surface microhardness and conversion ratios
Descargado para Anonymous User (n/a) en Pontifical Xavierian University de ClinicalKey.es por Elsevier en septiembre 18, 2019.
Para uso personal exclusivamente. No se permiten otros usos sin autorización. Copyright ©2019. Elsevier Inc. Todos los derechos reservados.
for a variety of resin composite compositions. Oper Dent
2004;29:698–704.
[15] Ruyter IE. Personal communication; April 2011.
[16] ISO 4049:2000 (3.). Dentistry—polymer-based filling,
restorative and luting materials; 7.10 Depth of cure, Class 2
materials. International Organization for Standardization;
2000.
[17] Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Influence of pulse-delay curing on
softening of polymer structures. J Dent Res 2001;80:1570–3.
[18] Watts DC. Reaction kinetics and mechanics in photo-
polymerised networks. Dent Mater 2005;21:27–35.
[19] Koch A, Kroeger M, Hartung M, Manetsberger I, Hiller KA,
Schmalz G, et al. Influence of ceramic translucency on
curing efficacy of different light-curing units. J Adhes Dent
2007;9:449–62.
[20] Yan YL, Kim YK, Kim KH, Kwon TY. Changes in degree of
conversion and microhardness of dental resin cements.
Oper Dent 2010;35:203–10.
[21] Rueggeberg FA, Cole MA, Looney SW, Vickers A, Swift EJ.
Comparison of manufacturer-recommended exposure
durations with those determined using biaxial flexure
strength and scraped composite thickness among a variety
of light-curing units. J Esthet Restor Dent 2009;21:43–61.
[22] Bennett AW, Watts DC. Performance of two blue
light-emitting-diode dental light curing units with distance
and irradiation-time. Dent Mater 2004;20:72–9.
[23] Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Influence of specimen diameter
on the relationship between subsurface depth and hardness
of a light-cured resin composite. Eur J Oral Sci 2003;111:
543–6.
[24] Moore BK, Platt JA, Borges G, Chu TM, Katsilieri I. Depth of
cure of dental resin composites: ISO 4049 depth and
microhardness of types of materials and shades. Oper Dent
2008;33:408–12.
[25] Leprince JG, Leveque P, Nysten B, Gallez B, Devaux J, Leloup
G. New insight into the “depth of cure” of dimethacrylate-
based dental composites. Dent Mater 2012;(January) [Epub
ahead of print].