A morphological and micro-tensile bond strength evaluation of a single-bottle adhesive to caries-affected human dentine after four different caries removal techniques

Çehrelį, Zafer C.; Yazici, Arife; Akca, Taner; Özgünaltay, Gül

doi:10.1016/s0300-5712(03)00011-3

Cited by 48 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Namely, micro hardness is significantly lower in caries-affected dentin [12]. In the operative treatment of carious lesions in dentin, the morphology and nature of prepared dentin surface influences bonding of adhesive restorative materials [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture Resistance of Restored Maxillary Premolars

Petronijevic

Marković

Sarcev

et al. 2013

Contemporary Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extensively damaged teeth can be restored by different core build-up materials. The aim of this study was to examine the fracture resistance of restored maxillary premolars with composite resin, dental amalgam and glass ionomer cement (GIC) using compressive strength test. Also, to analyse the influence of bond strength of restorative materials on intact and carious dentin. Eighty extracted human maxillary premolars with intact and carious dentin were used in the study. The control group consisted of ten unrestored teeth with intact dentin. Artificial defect in dentin was prepared using diamond bur up to the half of the anatomic crown of the tooth. After core build-up procedure, each specimen was mounted in auto polymerizing acrylic resin blocks 2mm below cement enamel junction and they were kept in distilled water at 37 o C one day before testing. Then, they were placed in specially adapted devices at an angle of 183 o to the longitudinal axis and subjected to a controlled load of 1mm per minute. There were significant differences among control group and restored teeth with composite resin, amalgam and GIC. Results showed that the best fracture values were obtained in control group (749,4N , then intact teeth restored with composite resin (492,5N) and amalgam (341,2N). In the group with carious dentin, values were lower, for composite resin 345,5 N and for amalgam 474,5N. There were no significant differences among restored groups with intact and carious dentin (p<0.05). The fracture force corresponding to the teeth restored with GIC were significantly lower compared to the control group and the group with composite resin and amalgam. Satisfactory mechanical properties of restored premolars were obtained using composite resin and dental amalgam as a core build-up material. The carious-affected dentin led to lower bond strength of restored teeth.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture Resistance of Restored Maxillary Premolars

Petronijevic

Marković

Sarcev

et al. 2013

Contemporary Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These studies have evaluated hardness 7,10,11 and micromorphology of carious [14][15][16] and sound permanent dentin, 12,13,17 rat dentin, 18 as well as resin bond strength to sound 17,19 and carious permanent dentin, 20,21 and nanoleakage of dentin adhesive to carious permanent dentin. 22 Histological changes on rat pulp tissue 23 have also been reported.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Carisolv on resin adhesion for two different adhesive systems to sound human primary dentin and young permanent dentin

Hosoya

Marshall

2005

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A fluorescência laser também tem sido utilizada para padronizar a amostra de experimentos (CEHRELI et al, 2003;HAAK;WICHT;NOACK, 2000;HOSSAIN et al, 2003). Os valores considerados por estes autores como dentina infectada são de 40 a 50 (CEHRELI et al, 2003;HAAK;WICHT;NOACK, 2000) e acima de 26 (HOSSAIN et al, 2003); e para a dentina afetada, os valores de fluorescência laser são de 15 (CEHRELI et al, 2003) e 20 (HOSSAIN et al, 2003.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Os valores considerados por estes autores como dentina infectada são de 40 a 50 (CEHRELI et al, 2003;HAAK;WICHT;NOACK, 2000) e acima de 26 (HOSSAIN et al, 2003); e para a dentina afetada, os valores de fluorescência laser são de 15 (CEHRELI et al, 2003) e 20 (HOSSAIN et al, 2003.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…No grupo Fuji IX, a fratura coesiva foi menor nos dentes tratados com Carisolv® na dentina afetada . Cehreli et al (2003) realizaram um estudo para avaliar a influência de diferentes métodos de remoção de cárie -convencional, remoção químico-mecânica (Carisolv®), abrasão a ar (Prep Star-Danville), sistema de preparo sônico (SonicMicro-Kavo) -na força de adesão à dentina afetada. Não houve diferenças significantes entre as modalidades de tratamento, embora a resistência de união tenha sido maior após a remoção do tecido cariado com abrasão a ar, seguida pelo grupo de preparo sônico, remoção químico-mecânica e remoção convencional com brocas, nessa ordem.…”

Section: Watson 2000b)unclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

"Avaliação da dentina remanescente após remoção de cárie com instrumento cortante rotatório e métodos químico-mecânicos, utilizando análise de microdureza, fluorescência laser e MEV"

Corrêa¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A morphological and micro-tensile bond strength evaluation of a single-bottle adhesive to caries-affected human dentine after four different caries removal techniques

Cited by 48 publications

References 28 publications

Fracture Resistance of Restored Maxillary Premolars

Fracture Resistance of Restored Maxillary Premolars

Influence of Carisolv on resin adhesion for two different adhesive systems to sound human primary dentin and young permanent dentin

"Avaliação da dentina remanescente após remoção de cárie com instrumento cortante rotatório e métodos químico-mecânicos, utilizando análise de microdureza, fluorescência laser e MEV"

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About