You are here

Home » Content

AMALGAM DOLGULARİN YENİLENME SEBEPLERİ VE SEKONDER ÇÜRÜK İLE İLİŞKİSİNİN İNCELENMESİ

AN EVALUATION OF THK REASONS FOR REPLACEMENT OK AMALGAM RESTORATIONS, AND THEIR RELATIONS TO SECONDARY CARIES

Journal Name:

  • Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2002

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
In this study, we aimed to determine the reasons for replacement of amalgam restorations, correlation between these reasons and the <igc of Lhe restorations. What we recorded were consistency underlying amalgam filling, replacement reasons of the patients who applied to the Faculty of Dentistry. Atatürk University and personal information about them. It was found that the most common reasons for replacement of amalgam restorations arc secondary caries 38(39.18 %) and fracture of restoration 35(37.11 #)• It was found out that 53 of restorations examined were hard (54.64 %) and 44 of those were soft dentine underlying amalgam. There was a correlation between the density and color (p<0,G00l) of the dentine underlying the amalgam. Caries detected in old amalgam restorations were mostly soft compared Lo those in newer ones (P<0,0U5).
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmada amalgam restorasyonların yenilenme sebepleri ile sekonder çürük arasındaki korelasyonunun Les-piti amaçladı Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş hekimliği Fakültesi Tedavi kliniğine yelen amalgam dolguları yenilenecek olan hastaların, yenilenme sebebi, dolgunun altındaki denlinin durumu ile hastaya ait bilgiler kaydedildi. Amalgam dolguları n yenilenmesinin en yaygın sebebi sekonder çürük 38(% 39,18) ve restorasyonun I rakLLirü 35(% 37.11) olarak tespit edil d i.İncelenen restorasyonların elli üçünün (% .54.641 altındaki denlin sert, 44'ünün (% 45.36) altında ise yumuşak dentin saptandı. Amalgam altındaki denlin yoğunluğu ile rengi arasında anlamlı ilişki bulundu (rx0,0Q01)- Eski amalgam dolgularda, yeni amalgam dolgulara göre daha çok yumuşak çürük tespit edildi (p<0,()to).
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-amalgam-dolgularin-yenilenme-sebepleri-sekonder-curuk-ile-iliskisinin-incelenmesi.pdf
  • 3
1-5
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Ceclham .ID, Makinson OF, Dfnvson AS, Replacement of low cooper amalgams by a group of general dental practitioners.A List Denial J. 1991 ;36 (3J:218-22,
2. Maelnnis WA, Ismail A. Brogan HJ- Placement and replacement of restorations in a military population. Dm Dent Assoc. 1991 Mar:57(3):227-3J.
3. Joyslon-Bcchal S, Kidd FAM, Brighton D. Assessment of caries activity releated to microbilogy al the enamel-dcntin junction during cavity preparation, dries Res. 1991:25:218.
4. Kidd HA M, Joyston-Rcchal S. Brighton
D.Microbiologica! validation assessments of cartes activity during cavity preparation. Caries RL*s.l 993J,27:4U2-08.
5. Mjör IA. The reason of replacement and age of tailed rctoraiions in general denial practice. ACLEI Odontol Scand. 1997; .1.5; 58-63.
6. Ovist J, Qvi.sL V, Majör IA. Place men t and longevity of amalgam ret orations in Denmark. Acta Odontol Scand.1990;48: 297-303.
7. Mjor IA. Placement and replacement of restorations. Oper Dent. 1981:6: 49-54
4
Atatürk Um
v.
Diş
Hck.Fak.Derg
. 011:12, Yıv\ Sayfa: I-X 2002
BAYINDIR, YİLDİZ
8. Qvisi V.'f'lıyl.stfup A, Majör IA. Restorative treatment pattern and longevity of amaigam restorations in Denmark. Acta Odonlol Scand. I98G;44:343-49.
9. Mjor IA, Toffcnctti F. Placement and replacement, uma]gam restorations in Italy, OpcrDcnt. 1992;17:70-73.
10. AINeyrish AS, Reasons lor placement and replacement of amalgam restoration in Jordan. İni î^eııtal J.20U1 pi-109-15.
11. hosier VI..Validity of clinical judgements for the presence of secondary caries associated with defective amalgam restorations. Br Dent J. 1994; 177:89-93
12. McComb D. Caries-detector dyes-how accurate and useful arc LlieyY .1 Can Dent Assoc. 2000 Apr;66 (4): 195-98.
13. Tas scry H, Dcjou J, Chafaic A, Camps J. In vivo diagnostic assessment of dentijial caries by junior and senior students using red acid dye. Kur J Dent Hduc 2001
Feb;5(I):38-42.
14. Fimenta 1.AK, Navarro MFL, Consolaro A.Secondary caries around amalgam restorations. .1 Ptosthet. Dent. 1995;74:219-22.
15. Matilda N, Fusayama T, Marginal fracture of amalgam restoration?;, J Prosthet Dent. 1970,23:658-666.
16. fSelcher MA, StcvvartfjP, Two year clinic evaluation of an amalgam adhesive, J Am Dent Assoc. 1997; 12K:309-14.
17. Browning WD, .lohnsun WW, Gregory PN.CUnical performance of bonded amalgam restorations at 42 months, .1 Ara I item Assoc. 2000; 131:6U7-1 I.
18. Burke FJT, Wilson NHF, Cheung SW, Mjör IA. Influence of patient factors on age of restorations at failure and reasons for their placement and rcpalccmcnt. J Dent. 2001 ;29:317-329.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com