You are here

Home » Content

FARKLI YÖNTEMLERLE UYGULANAN İKİ TİP POSTERIOR KOMPOZİT REZİN MATERYALİNİN DİŞ KASPLARINDA OLUŞTURDUĞU DEFORMASYON VE KIRILMA DAYANIKLILIĞI ÜZERİNE ETKİLERİ

THE EFFECT OF TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF POSTERIOR COMPOSITE RESIN MATERIALS APPLIED BY DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES ON DEFORMATION AND FRACTURE RESISTANCE OF TEETH CUSPS

Journal Name:

  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 1995

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
In this study, the cusp deformations and fracture resistance occured by direct posterior composite resin and indirect posterior composite resin inlay restorations on the weakened teeth because of the cavity preparations were investigated by comparison with in vitro techniques. The result of the evaluations of the data was obtained statistically; According to the deformation occured it was observed no difference between two filling materials that we used but ii was seemed differences in these values on the time progressed. According to the fracture resistance, as the groups compared two by two, the teeth restored with Heliomolar composite and the teeth restored with EOS composite inlays, and also EOS group and unprepared teeth groups showed significant differences but Heliomolar group and the unprepared teeth group showed no significant differences.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmada, direkt posterior kompozit rezin ve indi-rekt posterior kompozit rezin inley restorasyonların, kavite preparasyonları ile zayıflatılmış dişlerde oluşturdukları kasp de formasyonları ve kırılma dayanık-hlkları, in vitro yöntemlerle karşılaş tunlar ak incelendi. Elde edilen bulguların istatistiksel olarak değerlendirilmeleri sonucunda; Ortaya çıkan defomıasyon açısından; kullandığımız iki dolgu maddesi arasında bir fark olmadığı gözlenirken, bu değerlerin zaman içindeki değişimlerinin fark-h olduğu ortaya konuldu. Kırılma dayanıklılığı açısından gruplar ikişer ikişer karşılaştırıldığında; Heliomolar kompozitle restore edilen dişler Üe EOS kompozit hileyle restore edilen dişler ve EOS grubu ile sağlam dişlerden oluşan grup arasında önemli bir fark olduğu görülürken, Heliomolar grubu ile sağlam dişlerden oluşan grup arasında önemli bir fark olmadığı saptandı.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-farkli-yontemlerle-uygulanan-iki-tip-posterior-kompozit-rezin-materyalinin-dis-kasplarinda-olusturdugu-deformasyon-kirilma-dayanikliligi-uzerine-etkileri.pdf
  • 2
121
126
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1.
BiedermanJ
D : Direct composite resin inley. J Prosthet Dent \989, 02:249-53.
2. Bowen RL, RapsonJE, Dicson G. Hardening shirnka-ge and hiygroscopic expansion of composite resins.J Dent Res 1982, 61 : 654-8.
3. Council on Dental Materiles, Instruments, and Equipment : Posterior composite resins JADA 1986. 112 : 707-9.
4. Craig RC: Restorative Dental Materials. 8th Ed, The CV Mosby Company, St Louis. 1989: 255-79.
5. Eakle WS : Increased fracture resistance of teeth : comparison of five bonded composite resin systems. Quint fa* 1986, 77:17-29.
6. Gelb MN, Barouch E, Simonsen RJ : Resistance to cusp fracture in class II prepared and restored premolars, y Prosthet Dent 1986, 55 : 184-5.
7. Jensen ME, Chan DCN : Polimerization shrinkage and micro leakage. International Symposium on Resin Based Posterior Filling Materials, 1985 (Kaynak 11 den alınmıştır). (McCullock, AJ Smith, BGN : Invitro studies of cus-pal movement produced by adhesive materials. Br Dent J 1986, 161 : 405-9.
8. Joynt B, Wieczkowski G, Klockowsk R, Davis EL : Fracture resistance of teeth restored with amalgam versus composite resin. J Dent Res 1985, 64 : 350, (Abst No: 1576).
9. Joynt B, Wieczkowski G, Klockowsk R, Davis EL : Effects of composite restorations on resistance to cuspal fracture in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1987, 57: 431-5.
10. LandyNA, Simonsen RJ : Cusp Fracture strength in class II composite resin restorations. J Dent Res Special Issue, 1984, 63:175 (Abst No: 40).
11. McCullock AJ, Smith BGN : In vitro studies of cuspal movement produced by adhesive restorative materials. Br DentJ 1986, 161: 405-9.
12. McCullock AJ, Smith BGN : In vitro studies of cusp reinforcement with adhesive restorative materials. Br Dent J
1986, 161: 450-2.
13. MondelIİ J, Steagall L, Ishikiriama A, Navarro MFLN, Soares FB : Fracture strength of human teeth with cavity preparations J Prosthet Dent 1980, 45:419-22.
14. Morin D, Delong R, Douglas WH : Cusp reinforcement by the acidetch tecnique.y Dent Res 1984, 63 :1075-8.
15. Reel. DC.Mitchell, MS : Fracture resistance of teeth restored with class II conposite restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1989, 61:177-80.
16. Sallis, SG, Hood, JAA, Kirk, EEJ, Stokes, NS: Impact fracture energy of human premolar teeth. J Prosthet Dent
1987, 58:43-8.
17. ShethJJ, FullerJL, Jensen ME: Cuspal deformation and fracture resistance of teeth with dentin adhesives and composites, y Prosthet Dent 60:560-569, 1988.
18. Wieczkowski G, Joynt RB, Klockowski R, Davis EL : Effects of incremental versus bulk fill technique on resistance to cuspal fracture of teeht restored with posterior composites.y Prosthet Dent 1988,60: 283-87.

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