Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBayrak, S.
dc.contributor.authorSen Tune, E.
dc.contributor.authorTuloglu, N.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T14:27:57Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T14:27:57Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.issn1053-4628
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.36.3.h827442j74862742
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/16613
dc.descriptionTuloglu, Nuray/0000-0001-6410-9126; BAYRAK, SULE/0000-0001-7023-2358en_US
dc.descriptionWOS: 000305207200010en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 22838231en_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: To evaluate the effect of different surface pretreatments on the marginal microleakage of Vitremer restorations. Study Design: Class V cavities were prepared on the labial and lingual surfaces of extracted human third molar teeth. Cavities were randomly distributed into six groups according to surface treatment, as follows: Group NC (negative control): no surface treatment; Group VP (positive control): Vitremer Primer; Group PA: 32% phosphoric acid; Group PAA: 20% polyactylic acid; Group PLP: self-etch adhesive (Prompt L Pop); Group PB: etch&rinse adhesive (Prime&Bond NT). All cavities were restored with Vitremer. Teeth were thermocycled, stained with 0.5% basic fuchsin dye and sectioned. Microleakage values were quantitatively assessed by linear measurement of dye penetration using image-analyzing software. Differences between occlusal and gingival microleakage values within groups were evaluated using paired t-tests, and differences among groups were analysed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey tests. Results: There were statistically significant differences between the occlusal and gingival microleakage values for all groups (p<0.05). Micro leakage differed significantly among surface pretreatment groups (p<0.001). The negative control and PLP groups showed similar microleakage values, but were significantly higher than other groups for both margins. Although there were no statistically significant differences between positive control and PA, PAA, PB groups, microleakage values of positive control group were smaller than all other experimental groups except for PB group. Conclusions: Vitremer restorations require surface pretreatment to prevent excessive microleakage. Pretreatment with etch&rinse adhesives and Vitremer Primer may reduce microleakage of Vitremer restorations.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherJournal Pedodontics Incen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.17796/jcpd.36.3.h827442j74862742en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectAdhesivesen_US
dc.subjectConditionersen_US
dc.subjectMarginal leakageen_US
dc.subjectResin-modified glass ionomer cementen_US
dc.titleThe Effects of Surface Pretreatment on the Microleakage of Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement Restorationsen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOMÜen_US
dc.identifier.volume36en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage279en_US
dc.identifier.endpage284en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record