Views
10
Downloands
1
Amaç: Nanohibrit bir kompozit rezinin tamirinde sekiz farklı yüzey işlemi ve üç farklı kompozit rezinin etkisini mikrosızıntı açısından değerlendirmektir. Materyal ve Metot: Nanohibrit kompozit rezin Filtek Z550 (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, ABD) ile hazırlanan bloklar yüzey işlemlerine göre Grup 1 (kontrol), Grup 2(frez), Grup 3 (frezz+silan), Grup 4 (Al2O3), Grup 5 (Al2O3+silan), Grup 6 (tribokimyasal silika kaplama), Grup 7 (lazer), Grup 8 ( lazer+silan) olmak üzere ayrıldı. Örneklere yaşlandırma ve yüzey işlemleri yapıldıktan sonra her grup tamir kompozitleri (Filtek Z550, G-aenial Flo (GC Dental Products Corp, Kasugai, Aichi 486-0844, Japonya) ve Vertise Flow (Kerr Italia, Salerno, İtalya)) uygulanmak üzere 3’er alt gruba ayrıldı. Tamir işleminden sonra örnekler 1000 devir termal siklus cihazında bekletildi. Daha sonra mikrosızıntı testi yapılıp istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Mikrosızıntı testinde tüm grupların ortalamaları skor 0 ‘’sızıntı yok’’ olarak bulunmuştur. Sonuç: Yüzey işlemleri ve kompozitler arasında istatistiksel olarak fark yoktur. Anahtar kelimeler: Kompozit tamiri, Cojet, Er:YAG lazer, mikrosızıntı, kendinden adezivli akışkan kompozit Abstract Objective: To evaluate the effect of eight different surface treatments and three different composite resins in the repair of a nanohybrid composite resin in terms of microleakage. Materials and Methods: Blocks prepared with nanohybrid composite resin Filtek Z550 (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) were classified into Group 1 (control), Group 2 (frez), Group 3 (frez + silane), Group 4 ), Group 5 (Al2O3 + silane), Group 6 (tribochemical silica coating), Group 7 (laser), Group 8 (laser + silane). After the aging and surface treatments of the samples were performed, each group was divided into three sub-grups for application of repair composites (Filtek Z550, G-aenial Flo (GC Dental Products Corp., Kasugai, Aichi 486-0844, Japan) and Vertise Flow (Kerr Italia, Salerno, Italy) the lower subgroup was separated. After the repair, the samples were stored in a thermal cycle of 1000 cycles. Then, a microleakage test was made and evaluated statistically. Results: In microleakage test, the average of all groups was found as 0 '' no leakage ''. Conclusion: No statistical difference was found in this regard between surface treatments and composite groups. Key Words: Composite repair, Cojet, Er:YAG laser, microleakage, self-adhesive flowable composit
The purpose is to assess the effect of eight different surface processes and three different composite processes in the repair of a composite resin in terms of microsisection. Materials and Methods: Nanohybrid composite resin Filter Z550 (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) prepared blocks according to surface processes were divided into Group 1 (Control), Group 2 (Frez), Group 3 (Frezz+Silan), Group 4 (Al2O3), Group 5 (Al2O3+Silan), Group 6 (Tribokemical Silicon Cover), Group 7 (Laser), Group 8 (Laser+Silan). Following the ageing and surface processes, each group was divided into 3 subgroups for the use of repair compounds (Filtek Z550, G-aenial Flo (GC Dental Products Corp, Kasugai, Aichi 486-0844, Japan) and Vertise Flow (Kerr Italia, Salerno, Italy). After the repair process, the samples were left in the 1000-voltage thermal cycle device. The microsis is then tested and evaluated statistically. Results: In the microscopy test, the average of all groups was scored as 0 "No disruption". There is no statistical difference between surface processes and composites. Abstract Objective: To evaluate the effect of eight different surface treatments and three different composite resins in the repair of a nanohybrid composite resin in terms of microleakage. Materials and Methods: Blocks prepared with nanohybrid composite resin Filtek Z550 (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) were classified into Group 1 (control), Group 2 (frez), Group 3 (frez + silane), Group 4 ), Group 5 (Al2O3 + silane), Group 6 (tribochemical silica coating), Group 7 (laser), Group 8 (laser + silane). After the aging and surface treatments of the samples were performed, each group was divided into three sub-groups for application of repair composites (Filtek Z550, G-aenial Flo (GC Dental Products Corp., Kasugai, Aichi 486-0844, Japan) and Vertise Flow (Kerr Italia, Salerno, Italy) the lower subgroup was separated. After the repair, the samples were stored in a thermal cycle of 1000 cycles. Then, a microleakage test was made and evaluated statistically. Results: In microleakage test, the average of all groups was found as 0 '' no leakage ''. Conclusion: No statistical difference was found in this regard between surface treatments and composite groups. Keywords: Composite repair, Cojet, Er:YAG laser, microleakage, self-adhesive flowable composit
Field : Sağlık Bilimleri
Journal Type : Uluslararası
Article Detail 
Similar Articles
Journal Information
Listen Paper
Cite
Print This Page
Share
Mendeley
