Journals / Gülhane Tıp Dergisi / 2010 / Cilt: 52 - Sayı: 1

Hibrid-kompozid ve farklı bonding ajanların kullanıldığı kök kanal tedavili dişlerin, bukkal va palatinal tüberkül kırılma dirençleri

Buccal and palatal cusps fracture resistance of root filled teeth using various dentine bonding agents and hybrid composite resin

Pages
1–6
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

When samples were investigated, it was observed that there was no statistically significant difference between buccal and palatal cusps of mesial- occlusal-distal cavities which were restorated with hybrid composite and different bonding adhesives.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, we aimed to compare the buccal and palatal cusp fracture resistance of endodontically treated primary maxillary premolars with mesial- occlusal-distal cavity which was restored with composite resin by using different types of bonding adhesives.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A hundred extracted double rooted human maxillary premolars were randomly separated into five groups in which 20 teeth were included in each group.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When samples were investigated, it was observed that there was no statistically significant difference between buccal and palatal cusps of mesial- occlusal-distal cavities which were restorated with hybrid composite and different bonding adhesives.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, we aimed to compare the buccal and palatal cusp fracture resistance of endodontically treated primary maxillary premolars with mesial- occlusal-distal cavity which was restored with composite resin by using different types of bonding adhesives. A hundred extracted double rooted human maxillary premolars were randomly separated into five groups in which 20 teeth were included in each group. Group 1 was restorated with total performance hybrid spectrum hybrid composite and Prime&Bond NT, and Group 2 was restorated with total performance hybrid spectrum hybrid composite and Clearfil S-Tri Bond. Group 3 was restorated with total performance hybrid spectrum hybrid composite and Clearfil SE Bond. Group 4 was considered as positive control, and Group 5 was considered as negative control. Also each experimental group was divided into two subgroups of 10 teeth in order to compare the values of buccal and palatal cusp fracture resistance. Group 3, in which Clearfil SE Bond was used showed a higher value of fracture resistance than Group 1, in which Prime&Bond NT was used. When samples were investigated, it was observed that there was no statistically significant difference between buccal and palatal cusps of mesial- occlusal-distal cavities which were restorated with hybrid composite and different bonding adhesives.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, farklı tipte bonding ajan kullanarak kompozit rezin ile restore edilen meziyo-oklüzo-distal kaviteli ve endodontik olarak tedavi edilmiş üst birinci küçük azı dişlerinin bukkal ve palatinal tüberkül kırılma dirençlerini karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Çekilmiş çift köklü 100 adet üst çene küçük azı (maksillar premolar) dişleri her bir grup 20 diş içerecek şekilde rastgele 5 gruba ayrıldı. Grup 1 total performans hibrid spektrum hibrid kompozit ve Prime&Bond NT ile ve Grup 2 total performans hibrid spektrum hibrid kompozit ve Clearfil S-Tri Bond ile restore edildi. Grup 3 total performans hibrid spektrum hibrid kompozit ve Clearfil SE Bond ile restore edildi. Grup 4 pozitif kontrol ve Grup 5 negatif kontrol grupları olarak belirlendi. Ayrıca deney gruplarının her biri kendi içinde bukkal ve palatinal tüberkül kırılma direnç değerlerini karşılaştırmak için 10 adet dişten oluşan alt gruplara ayrıldı. Clearfil SE Bond'un kullanıldığı Grup 3, Prime&Bond NT'nin kullanıldığı Grup 1'den istatistiksel olarak daha yüksek kırılma direnci değeri gösterdi. Örnekler değerlendirildiğinde, hibrid kompozit ve farklı bonding ajanlar ile restore edilen meziyo-oklüzo-distal kavitelerin bukkal ve palatinal tüberküllerinde kırılma dirençleri arasındaki farklılığın istatistiksel olarak anlamlı olmadığı görüldü.

🔖

Cite This Article

OKTAY, E. A., ŞAHİNKESEN, G. (2010). Hibrid-kompozid ve farklı bonding ajanların kullanıldığı kök kanal tedavili dişlerin, bukkal va palatinal tüberkül kırılma dirençleri. Gülhane Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 52 - Sayı: 1, 1–6. https://ajindex.com/articles/215181

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Wagnild G, Muller K. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth. In: Cohen S, Hargreaves KM (eds). Pathways of the Pulp. 9th ed. St Louis: Mosby Co, 2006: 786-821
  2. Belli S, Erdemir A, Özcopur M, et al. The effect of fibre insertion on fracture rersistance of root filled molar teeth with MOD preparations restored with composite. Int Endod J 2005; 38: 73-80
  3. Eissman HF, Radke RA. Postendodontic restoration. In: Cohen S, Burns RC (eds). Pathways of the Pulp. St Louis: Mosby Inc, 1984: 701-749
  4. Jantarat J, Palamara J, Msser H. An investigation of cuspal deformation and delayed recovery after occlusal loading. J Dent 2001; 29: 363-370
  5. Doyglas WH, Sakaguchi RL, DeLong R. Frictional effects between natural teeth in an artificial mouth. Dental Mater 1985; 1: 115-119
  6. El-Badrawy WA. Cuspal deflection of maxillary premolars restored with bonded amalgam. Oper Dent 1999; 24: 337-343
  7. Mannocci F, Bertellii E, Sherriff M, Watson TF, Ford TR. Three-year clinical comparison of survival endodontically treated teeth restored with either full cast coverage or with direct composite restoration. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88: 297-301
  8. Belli S, Erdemir A, Yildirim C. Reinforcement effect of polyethylene fiber in root filled teeth: comparison of two restoration techniques. Int Endod J 2006; 39: 136-142
  9. Sabbagh J, Vreven J, Leloup G. Dynamic and static moduli of elasticity of resin-based materials. Dent Mater 2002; 18: 64-71
  10. Manhart J, Kunzelmann KH, Chen HY, Hickel R. Mechanical properties and wear behavior of light cured packable composite resins. Dent Mater 2000; 16: 33-40
  11. Al-Sharaa KA, Watts DC. Stickiness prior to some light cured resin composites. Dent Mater 2003; 19: 182-187
  12. Trope M, Tronstad L. Resistance to fracture of endodontically-treated premolars restored with glass ionomer cement or acid etch resin composite. J Endod 1991; 17: 257-259
  13. Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: A systematic review of current clinical trials. Dental Mater 2005; 21: 864-881
  14. Knobloch LA, Gailey D, Azer S, Johnton WM, Clelland N, Kerby RE. Bond strengths of one-and two-step self-etch adhesive systems. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 97: 216-222
  15. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B. The current status of bonding to dentinanno. Int J Oral Med Sci 2007; 6: 45-60
  16. Eakle WS, Maxwell EH, Braly BV. Fractures of posterior teeth in adults. J Am Dent Assoc 1986; 112: 215-