SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Derg.(. Clinical Dentistry and Research) / 2007 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 3

Resin modifiye cam İyonomer simanların çözünürlük miktarlarının değerlendirilmesi

Evaluation of the solubility of resin-modified glass ionomer cements

İbrahim TULUNOĞLU
Nilüfer Çelebi BERİAT
Pages
3–7
Publication Date
2022-10-17
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)

Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, Advance cement showed better solubility properties

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the solubility levels of three different resin modified glass ionomer cements namely, Advance (Caulk/Denstply Inc., USA), Vitremer (3M Dental Products, USA) and Protec-Cem (R&D Vivadent, Liechtenstein).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: Ten specimens for each group, 15±1 mm Ø hole and 1mm thickness were prepared.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, Advance cement showed better solubility properties
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the solubility levels of three different resin modified glass ionomer cements namely, Advance (Caulk/Denstply Inc., USA), Vitremer (3M Dental Products, USA) and Protec-Cem (R&D Vivadent, Liechtenstein). Material and Method: Ten specimens for each group, 15±1 mm Ø hole and 1mm thickness were prepared. With a the samples were dried and weighed (M1 value). Then the specimens were stored in deionized water for 7 days and than weighed again (M2 value). Lastly, the specimen were washed, dried and weighed again (M3 value). Solubility was calculated according to the formula Wsol= (M1–M3)/V where, Wsol is solubility of test material (µg/mm3) and V is volume of test material (mm3) The data were evaluated with Kruskal-Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests (pVitremer>Advance. Kruskal – Wallis test was used as there is a difference between the amount of solubility of the resin modified glass ionomer cements (x2=22,261, p=0,0). Mann- Whitney U test was used to compare cement groups and there was a significant difference. (p≤0,0). Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, Advance cement showed better solubility properties

Özet

Amaç: Bu invitro çalışmanın amacı üç farklı resinmodifiyecam iyonomer simanın; Advance (Caulk/Denstply Inc., U.S.A.), Vitremer (3M Dental Products,U.S.A.) and Protec-Cem (R&D Vivadent, Liechtenstein)çözünürlük miktarlarının belirlenmesidir.Gereç ve Yöntem:Her grup için 15 mm çapında ve 1 mmyüksekliğinde örnekler hazırlandı. Örnekler kurutulduve tartıldı. (M1) Örnekler daha sonra 7 gün deiyonizesu içerisinde bekletildi ve tartıldı (M2). Son olarakörnekler yıkandı kurutuldu ve tekrar tartıldı (M3).Çözünürlüğün hesaplanmasında şu formül kullanıldı;Wsol:(M1–M3)/VTest materyalinin çözünürlüğü (μg/mm3) V: silindirinhacmi (mm3). Verilerin istatistik değerlendirilmesindeKruskal-Wallis ve Mann-Whitney U testleri kullanıldı(pVitremer>Advance.Rezin modifiye cam iyonomer simanların çözünürlükmiktarların gruplararası karşılaştırması Kruskal-Wallis testi ile yapılmıştır ve siman grupları arası farkönemlidir, (x2=22,261, p=0,0). Tüm test gruplarıikişerli olarak karşılaştırıldığında farklar istatistikolarak önemli bulunmuştur (p

🔖

Cite This Article

TULUNOĞLU, İ., BERİAT, N. Ç. (2022). Resin modifiye cam İyonomer simanların çözünürlük miktarlarının değerlendirilmesi. Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Derg.(. Clinical Dentistry and Research), Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 3, 3–7. https://ajindex.com/articles/528431

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Zaimoğlu A, Can G, Ersoy E, Aksu L. Diş Hekimliğinde Maddeler Bilgisi, 305-306, Ankara Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Yayınları, 1993 Ankara 2. Smith DC, Williams DF. Biocompatibility of Dental Materials. CRC Press, 1982 Florida 3. Graham JM. Glass-ionomer cements: Past, present and future. Oper Dent. 1994;19: 82-90 4. Zeghbroeck LV. Cements. J Esthet Dent. 1994;7: 49-58 5. Mc Cabe J F, Walls A.G. Applied dental materials. Blackwell Science Ltd. 1998 London 5. Ed. 6. Knobloch LA, Kerby ER, Seghi R, Berlin JS, Lee JS. Fracture Toughness of Resin-Based Luting Cements, J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 83: 204-209 7. Diaz-Arnold AM. Current Status of Luting Agents For Fixed Prosthodontics, J Prosthet Dent. 1999; 81: 135-141 8. Mitchell CA, Douglas WH, Cheng YS. Fracture Toughness of Conventional, Resin Modified Glass Ionomer and Composite Luting Cements. Dent Mater. 1999; 15: 7-13 9. Yap A, Lee CM. Water Sorption and Solubility of Resin Modified Polyalkenoate Cements. J Oral Rehabil. 1997; 24: 310-314 10. Li ZC, White SN. Mechanical Properties of Dental Luting Cements. J Prosthet Dent. 1999; 81: 597-609 11. Cattani-Lorente MA, Dupuis V, Moya F, Payan J, Meyer JM. Comperative Study of the Pysical Properties of the Polyacid Modified Glass Ionomer Cement. Dent Mater. 1999;15: 21-32 12. Burgess JO, Norling BK. Improvements in Adhesive Luting Cements. Compend Contin Edu Dent. 1996; 42: 67 13. Bertacchinis M, Abate PF, Blanck A, Baglieto MF, Macchi RL. Solubility and Fluoride Release in Ionomers and Compomers. Quintessence Int. 1999; 30: 193-197 14. Iwami Y, Yamamoto H, Sato W, Kawai K, Torii M, Ebisu S. Weight Change of Various Light-cured Restorative Materials after Water Immersion. Oper Dent. 1998;23: 132- 137 15. Cho E, Kopel H, White SN. Moisture Susceptibility of Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Materials. Quintessence Int. 1995; 26: 351-358 16. Mojon P, Kaltio R, Feduik D, Hawbolt EB, McEntee MI. Short-Term Contamination of Luting Cements by Water and Saliva. Dent. Mater. 1996;12: 83-87 17. Oilo G. Luting Cements. Int Dent J. 1991;41: 81-88 18. International Organization for Standardization (ISO 1988): Dental Resin Based Restorative Materials, Specification No: 4049, 8-9 19. Gemalmaz D, Yoruç B, Ozcan M, Alkumru H. Effect of Early Water Contact on Solubility of Glass Ionomer Luting Cement. J Prosthet Dent. 1998; 80: 474-478 20. Watts DC, Kisumbi BK, Toworfe GK. Dimensional Changes of Resin Ionomer Restoratives in Aqueous and Neutral Media. Dent. Mater. 2000; 16: 8