Yazar "Almaz M." seçeneğine göre listele

Listeleniyor 1 - 3 / 3
  • [ X ]
    Öğe
    Comparison of chemomechanical caries removal using Papacárie versus conventional method in children
    (Medknow Publications, 2016) Almaz M.; Sönmez I.; Oba A.
    Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy of chemomechanical caries removal (Papacárie), compared with the conventional method. Materials and Methods: The study consisted of 50 primary molars selected from 25 healthy children (mean age 7.6 ± 1.1). Each patient had at least two primary molars with approximately equal-size caries lesions. Both treatments were carried out in the same session. Before and after treatment, fluorescence values were obtained using DIAGNOdent Pen and time needed for caries removal was recorded. Each patient was asked whether he/she felt any pain, requested for local anesthesia, which treatment he/she preferred, and behavior of the patient during caries removal was assessed. Data were analyzed using McNemar, Wilcoxon signed rank, and Mann-Whitney U-test. Results: The clinical evaluation revealed that all the cavities were caries free after both techniques. Comparison of the difference in fluorescence values showed that readings were lower after conventional method (P < 0.05). The time taken for chemomechanical caries removal was approximately 2 times longer (t-test). There was no difference between two methods in terms of pain and patient behavior (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Chemomechanical caries removal and conventional method exhibited similar efficacy in caries removal.
  • [ X ]
    Öğe
    Comparison of shear bond strength of self-adhering flowable composite with different flowable composites to dentin
    (Medknow Publications, 2016) Almaz M.; Oba A.; Sönmez I.; Sönmez D.
    Purpose: The purpose of this study was to measure and compare the shear bond strength of a self-adhering flowable resin composite with different flowable composites to dentin. Materials and Methods: A total of 48 extracted teeth were divided randomly into four groups, and dentin surfaces were exposed. Following materials were applied to dentin surfaces; Group I: VF (self-adhering flowable composite), Group II: CSE Bond (two-step self-etch adhesive) + CMF (conventional flowable composite), Group III: AB SE (one-step self-etch adhesive) + AF (conventional flowable composite), Group IV: AEO (one-step self-etch adhesive) + FUF (conventional flowable composite). The specimens were subjected to shear loading using a universal testing machine. The type of failure was detected with an illuminated microscope. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey multiple comparison test were used to determine statistical significance differences between groups. Results: Mean shear bond strength values were ranked as follows; Group II > Group IV > Group III > Group I. Statistically significant differences were found among all groups (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Group I; the self-adhering flowable resin composite had the lowest shear bond strength values while Group II; showed the highest shear bond strength among the materials tested.
  • [ X ]
    Öğe
    Shear bond strength of different restorative materials to mineral trioxide aggregate and Biodentine
    (Medknow Publications, 2017) Tulumbaci F.; Almaz M.; Arikan V.; Mutluay M.
    Significance of Study: Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Biodentine (calcium silicate-based materials) have great importance in dentistry. There is no study comparing the bond strength of Biodentine and MTA for composite, compomer, and compomer or resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC). Although many advantages of Biodentine over MTA; in this study, MTA has shown better shear bond strength (SBS) to restorative materials. Aim: Recently, a variety of calcium silicate-based materials are often used for pulp capping, perforation repair, and endodontic therapies. After those treatment procedures, teeth are commonly restored with composite resin, (RMGIC materials in pediatric dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate the SBS of composite resin (Filtek™ Z250; 3M ESPE, USA), compomer (Dyract XP; LD Caulk/Dentsply, USA), and resin-modified glass ionomer (Photac-Fil Quick Aplicap; 3M ESPE, USA) to white MTA and Biodentine. Materials and Methods: Ninety acrylic cylindrical blocks were prepared and divided into two groups (n = 45). The acrylic blocks were randomly allocated into 3 subgroups; Group-1A: MTA + composite (Filtek™ Z250), Group-1B: MTA + compomer (Dyract XP), Group-1C: MTA + RMGIC (Photac-Fil Quick Aplicap), Group-2A: Biodentine + composite, Group-2B: Biodentine + compomer, Group-2C: Biodentine + RMGIC. The specimens were mounted in Universal Testing Machine. A crosshead speed 1 mm/min was applied to each specimen using a knife-edge blade until the bond between the MTA/Biodentine and restorative material failed. Failure modes of each group were evaluated under polarized light microscope at ×40 magnification. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between MTA + Composite resin with MTA + Compomer; and MTA + RMGIC with Biodentine + RMGIC (P > 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between other groups (P < 0.05). Conclusions: The results of the present study displayed that although many advantages of Biodentine over MTA; MTA has shown better SBS to compomer and composite resin materials than Biodentine.