Farklı restoratif materyallerin tünel restorasyonların marjinal sırt dayanıklılığı üzerine etkilerinin in vitro olarak değerlendirilmesi

Nihal Beldüz Kara; Yücel Yılmaz; Özge Eyüpoğlu

doi:10.7126/cdj.2013.1798

EN TR

-

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was toevaluate the effects of a restorative glass-ionomercement (Fuji IX Capsule), a flowable compositeresin (Tetric Flow) and an undirection S2 glassfiber combined with flowable composite resin(Tetic Flow + Splint-it) on marginal ridge strengthin approximal caries which were not included themarginal ridge.Materials and Methods: For this reason, thirtyfreshly extracted and without caries or marginalridge defect second premolar teeth were selected.The data obtained from samples subjected to themarginal ridge strength test were statisticallyanalyzed with one-way ANAVO and LSD multiplerange test.Results: The highest mean value was obtainedfrom flowable composite plus fiber material and thelowest mean value was obtained from Fuji IXcapsule material. The difference between groupswas found statistically significant (p<0.05).Conclusion: The tunnel preparation filled withan undirection S2 glass fiber combined withflowable composite is a suitable treatment forproximal caries lesions.

Keywords

Tunnel restorations, fractureresistance.

Farklı restoratif materyallerin tünel restorasyonların marjinal sırt dayanıklılığı üzerine etkilerinin in vitro olarak değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a restorative glass-ionomer cement (Fuji IX Capsule), a flowable composite resin (Tetric Flow) and an undirection S2 glass fiber combined with flowable composite resin (Tetic Flow + Splint-it) on marginal ridge strength in approximal caries which were not included the marginal ridge.

Materials and Methods: For this reason, thirty freshly extracted and without caries or marginal ridge defect second premolar teeth were selected. The data obtained from samples subjected to the marginal ridge strength test were statistically analyzed with one-way ANAVO and LSD multiple range test.

Results: The highest mean value was obtained from flowable composite plus fiber material and the lowest mean value was obtained from Fuji IX capsule material. The difference between groups was found statistically significant (p<0.05).

Conclusion: The tunnel preparation filled with an undirection S2 glass fiber combined with flowable composite is a suitable treatment for proximal caries lesions.

ÖZET

Amaç: Çalışmamızın amacı, marjinal sırtı içine almayan ara yüz çürüklerinde, ultra konservatif yaklaşım olan tünel restorasyonlarında, restoratif cam ionomer siman (Fuji IX Kapsül), akıcı kompozit rezin (Tetric Flow) ve akıcı kompozit rezin ile kombine edilmiş olan bir tek yönlü S2 cam fiberin (Tetric Flow + Splint-it) marjinal sırt dayanıklılığı üzerine etkilerinin incelenmesidir.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu amaçla herhangi bir çürük ve marjinal sırt defekti bulunmayan 30 adet çekilmiş 2. küçük azı dişi kullanılmıştır. Marjinal sırt fraktürü basınç testi işlemine tabi tutulan örneklerden elde edilmiş olan ortalama değerlere tek yönlü varyans analizi ve LSD çoklu karşılaştırma testi uygulanmıştır.

Bulgular: En yüksek ortalama değer akıcı kompozit + fiber materyalinden, en düşük ortalama değer ise Fuji IX Kapsül materyalinden elde edilmiştir. Gruplar arasındaki farklılık istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulunmuştur (p<0,05).

Sonuç: Tünel preparasyonların akıcı kompozit rezin ile kombine edilmiş olan bir tek yönlü S2 cam fiber ile restorasyonu arayüz çürük lezyonları için uygun bir tedavi yöntemidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tünel restorasyonlar; kırılma dayanıklılığı

References

Jinks GM. Fluoride-impregnated cements and their effect on the activity of interproximal caries. J Dent Child 1963;30:87-92.
Tyas MJ. Clinical evaluation of glassionomer cement restorations. J Appl Oral Sci 2006;14:10-13.
Wiegand A, Attin T. Treatment of proximal caries lesions by tunnel restorations. Dent Mater 2007;23:1461146
Smith DC. Composition and characteristics of glass ionomer cements. J Am Dent Assoc 1990;120:20-22.
Celik EU, Ermis B. Koruyucu rezin uygulamasının yüksek viskoziteli geleneksel cam iyonomer simanın mikrosertliği üzerine etkisinin in vitro olarak değerlendirilmesi. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Diş Hek Fak Derg 2008;11:87-90.
Mickenautsch S, Mount G, Yengopal V. Therapeutic effect of glassionomers: an overview of evidence. Aust Dent J 2011;56:10-15.
Kupietzky A, Houpt M, Mellberg J, Shey Z. Fluoride exchange from glass ionomer preventive resin restorations. Pediatr Dent 1994;16:340-345. Markovic D, Peric T. Clinical evaluation of glass-ionomer tunnel restorations in primary molars: 36 months results. Aust Dent J 2008;53:41-45. Lumley PJ, Fisher FJ. Tunnel restorations: a long-term pilot study over a minimum of five years. J Dent 1995;23:213-215.
Frankenberger R, Sindel J, Krämer N. Viscous glass-ionomer cements: a new alternative to amalgam in the primary dentition? Quintessence Int 1997;28:667-676.

Şener Y, Koyutürk AE. Üç farklı cam iyonomer simanın yüzey sertliklerinin karşılaştırılması. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Diş Hek Fak Derg 2006;9:91-94.
Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift EJ Jr, Stamatiades P, Wilkerson M. A characterization of first-generation flowable composites. J Am Dent Assoc 1998;129:567-577.
Covey D, Schulein TM, Kohout FJ. Marginal ridge strength of restored teeth with modified Class II cavity preparations. J Am Dent Assoc 1989;118(2):199-202.
Mondelli J, Steagall L, Ishikiriama A, de Lima Navarro MF, Soares FB. Fracture strength of human teeth with cavity preparations. J Prosthet Dent 1980;43(4):419-422.
Larson TD, Douglas WH, Geistfeld RE. Effect of prepared cavities on the strength of teeth. Oper Dent 1981;6:2
Strand GV, Tveit AB, Gjerdet NR, Eide GE. Marginal ridge strength of teeth with tunnel preparations. Int Dent J 1995;45:117–123.
Ehrnford LE, Fransson H. Compressive fracture resistance of the marginal ridge in large Class II tunnels restored with cermet and composite resin. Swed Dent J 1994;18:207-211.
Strand GV, Tveit AB. Effectiveness of caries removal by the partial tunnel preparation method. Scand J Dent Res 1993;101:270–273.
Yilmaz Y, Simsek S, Dalmis A, Gurbuz T, Kocogullari ME. Evaluation of stainless steel crowns cemented with glass-ionomer and resin-modified glass-ionomer luting cements. Am J Dent 2006;19:106-110.
Feilzer AJ, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Setting stresses in composites for two different curing modes. Dent Mater 1993;9:2-5.
Freilich MA, Karmaker AC, Burstone CJ, Goldberg AJ. Development and clinical applications of a lightpolymerized fiber-reinforced composite. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:311-318.
Ji W, Chen Z, Frencken JE. Strength of tunnel-restored teeth with different materials and marginal ridge height. Dent Mater 2009;25(11):1363-1370.
Kinney JH, Marshall SJ, Marshall GW. The mechanical properties of human dentin: a critical review and reevaluation of the dental literature. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2003;14:13-29.
Prabhu NT, Munshi AK, Shetty TR. Marginal ridge fracture resistance, microleakage and pulpal response to glass ionomer/glass cermet partial tunnel restorations. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1997;21:241-246.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

-

Journal Section

-

Authors

Nihal Beldüz Kara

Yücel Yılmaz

Özge Eyüpoğlu

Publication Date

May 1, 2013

Submission Date

October 30, 2012

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 1970 Volume: 16 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7126/cdj.2013.1798

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA53DZ87CP

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

EndNote

Beldüz Kara N, Yılmaz Y, Eyüpoğlu Ö (May 1, 2013) Farklı restoratif materyallerin tünel restorasyonların marjinal sırt dayanıklılığı üzerine etkilerinin in vitro olarak değerlendirilmesi. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 16 2 104–109.