Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorAtmaca, Yakup
dc.contributor.authorKaradaş, Muhammet
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-28T07:53:09Z
dc.date.available2024-03-28T07:53:09Z
dc.date.issued2024en_US
dc.identifier.citationAtmaca, Y., & Karadas, M. (2024). Clinical comparison of high-viscosity glass-hybrid systems with a sculptable bulk-fill composite resin in different cavity types. Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 10.1111/jerd.13221. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13221en_US
dc.identifier.issn1496-4155
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13221
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11436/8883
dc.description.abstractObjective: This randomized, double-blind clinical investigation assessed the performance of two high-viscosity glass-ionomer systems and a bulk-fill composite in different cavity types. Materials and Methods: In 146 participants, 360 (class I, II, and V) cavities were restored using three different materials (Equia Forte HT, Chemfill Rock, and SonicFill 2) with equal allocation. Using modified World Dental Federation criteria, restorations were assessed after 1 week, 6 months, and 18 months by an experienced examiner. Statistical analysis was conducted using Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon signed rank tests (α = 0.05). Results: After 18 months, 267 restorations were assessed in 116 participants. After 18 months, 5 Equia Forte HT restorations failed due to debonding and fracture. Only one loss was observed in the Chemfill Rock restorations. Equia Forte HT exhibited significantly lower retention than SonicFill 2 after 18 months (p = 0.019), irrespective of cavity type. At 1 week, 3 Class I restorations with SF showed postoperative sensitivity. The type of cavity did not affect the performance of the restorative materials used (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Equia Forte HT and Chemfill Rock presented similar clinical performance regardless of color match. Equia Forte HT showed a lower performance compared to SonicFill 2. Clinical significance: Glass-hybrid materials presented a lower performance in terms of color match or retention when compared to a sculptable bulk-fill composite resin.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectChemfill rocken_US
dc.subjectColor matchen_US
dc.subjectEquia forte HTen_US
dc.subjectRetentionen_US
dc.subjectSonicFill 2en_US
dc.subjectWorld dental federationen_US
dc.titleClinical comparison of high-viscosity glass-hybrid systems with a sculptable bulk-fill composite resin in different cavity typesen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentRTEÜ, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Klinik Bilimler Bölümüen_US
dc.contributor.institutionauthorAtmaca, Yakup
dc.contributor.institutionauthorKaradaş, Muhammet
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/jerd.13221en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster