Does ceramic translucency affect the degree of conversion of luting agents?

Applied Adhesion Science

Table 3 Results of the degree of C=C conversion in percentage (% DC) depending of the different lithium-disilicate translucencies interposition during photo-activation

Luting composite	DC after direct light activation	DC with light activation trough the ceramic discs
Luting composite	DC after direct light activation	High translucency (HT)	Low translucency (LT)	Medium opacity (MO)
Dual-activated resin-based cement (control) (RelyX ARC)	80.5 ± 0.9^Aa	82.9 ± 1.3^Aa	80.3 ± 0.7^Aa	83.9 ± 0.8^Aa
Photo-activated resin-based cement (RelyX Veneer)	73.9 ± 3.2^Ab	74.1 ± 2.7^Ab	73.3 ± 5.7^Ab	74.6 ± 2.0^Ab
Flowable resin-based composite (Filtek Z350 XT Flow)	68.9 ± 2.5^Ac	67.9 ± 1.5^Ac	65.4 ± 2.3^Ac	67.4 ± 3.8^Ac
Pre-heated conventional resin-based composite (Filtek Z350 XT)	65.3 ± 3.2^Ac	60.6 ± 2.3^Bd	55.5 ± 6.6^Cd	45.0 ± 3.0^Dd

Values are means ± standard deviations (n = 6)
In % DC column, distinct capital letters indicate significant difference among the different ceramic translucencies for each luting composite while distinct lowercase letters indicate significant difference among the luting composites for each ceramic translucency (α = 0.05). Significance values were: p < 0.001 for the luting composite, p = 0.010 for the ceramic translucency, and p = 0.001 for the interaction between the luting composite and the ceramic translucency