Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11499/47827
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRecen, Duygu-
dc.contributor.authorYazkan, Başak-
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-09T21:30:15Z-
dc.date.available2023-01-09T21:30:15Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.issn0011-4553-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5114/jos.2021.111617-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11499/47827-
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Despite the advancements in restorative materials, there are certain drawbacks, including microleakage resulting from insufficient wall adaptation. An effective seal at the tooth/restoration interface is crucial. Objectives: The aim of the study was to investigate microleakage of different self-adhesive restorative materials. Material and methods: Class-V cavities were prepared and divided into seven experimental groups with regards to applied material and pre-treatment procedures (n = 12). Cavities were restored with self-adhesive materials, such as hybrid glass ionomer (HGI) without pre-treatment (PT), HGI with PT, glass carbomer (GCP) without PT, GCP with PT, alkasite without adhesive resin (AR), alkasite with AR, nanohybrid composite resin with AR, and compared in terms of microleakage. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney U tests, with SPSS. Results: Significant difference in microleakage was found among enamel and dentin (p < 0.05). Leakage values from enamel were obtained as follows: Alkasite with AR = nanohybrid composite resin with AR < alkasite without AR < HGI with PT < HGI without PT = GCP with PT < GCP without PT, while leakage values obtained from dentin included alkasite with AR = nanohybrid composite resin with AR = alkasite without AR = HGI with PT < HGI without PT = GCP with PT < GCP without PT. Conclusions: Microleakage properties are material-dependent and may vary due to ingredients. Alkasite with AR could be an alternative to nanohybrid composite due to better sealing ability of both enamel and dentin, while alkasite without AR and HGI with PT are the preferred materials for dentin. GCP without PT showed the highest microleakage. © 2021 Termedia Publishing House Ltd.. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTermedia Publishing House Ltd.en_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Stomatologyen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectAlkasiteen_US
dc.subjectGlass carbomeren_US
dc.subjectHybrid glass ionomeren_US
dc.subjectMicroleakageen_US
dc.subjectNanohybrid composite resinen_US
dc.titleA comparative microleakage analysis of ion-releasing self-adherable materialsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.volume74en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage203en_US
dc.identifier.endpage210en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5114/jos.2021.111617-
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.authorscopusid57208738688-
dc.authorscopusid55846061700-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85123532709en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairetypeArticle-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
crisitem.author.dept06.01. Clinical Sciences-
Appears in Collections:Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / Scopus Indexed Publications Collection
Show simple item record



CORE Recommender

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

4
checked on Nov 16, 2024

Page view(s)

46
checked on Aug 24, 2024

Download(s)

14
checked on Aug 24, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check




Altmetric


Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.