Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorÖzyürek, Taha
dc.contributor.authorTopkara, Can
dc.contributor.authorKoçak, İmran
dc.contributor.authorYılmaz, Koray
dc.contributor.authorGündoğar, Mustafa
dc.contributor.authorUslu, Gülşah
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-21T11:18:49Z
dc.date.available2020-10-21T11:18:49Z
dc.date.issued2020en_US
dc.identifier.citationÖzyürek, T., Topkara, C., Koçak, İ., Yılmaz, K., Gündoğar, M. ve Uslu, G. (2020). Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth restored with different fiber post and core systems. Odontology, 108(4), 588-595. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10266-020-00481-4en_US
dc.identifier.issn1618-1247
dc.identifier.issn1618-1255
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10266-020-00481-4
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/5955
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different post and core systems, CAD/CAM crown placement on fracture strength of endodontically treated mandibular premolar teeth. One hundred forty single-rooted premolar teeth were randomly divided into a control group and six experimental groups as follows: control group (Group 1); FiberSite post luting with Clearfil DC Core Plus (Group 2); RelyX Fiber post luting and core build up with Clearfil DC Core Plus (Group 3); RelyX Fiber post luting with Clearfil DC Core Plus and core build up with Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior (Group 4); specimens that received CAD/CAM crowns after the same procedures performed in Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively (Groups 5, 6, and 7). Fracture strength tests were performed, and the failure modes were recorded. Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. The highest fracture resistance was observed in the control group and among the experimental groups in Group 4. Groups 3 and 5 showed similar fracture resistance followed by Group 2. The lowest fracture resistances were seen in the samples of Groups 6 and 7. While the fracture strength of Group 2 increased after the crown placement (Group 5), the fracture strength of Group 3 and Group 4 decreased (P < 0.05). While the specimens in Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 predominantly showed favorable failure, unfavorable failure was more frequent in Groups 5, 6, and 7.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherSpringeren_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccessen_US
dc.subjectMandibular Premolaren_US
dc.subjectEndodontically Treated Teethen_US
dc.subjectFiber Posten_US
dc.subjectCADen_US
dc.subjectCAMen_US
dc.subjectFracture Resistanceen_US
dc.titleFracture strength of endodontically treated teeth restored with different fiber post and core systemsen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.ispartofOdontologyen_US
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Endodonti Ana Bilim Dalıen_US
dc.authorid0000-0001-8656-7101en_US
dc.identifier.volume108en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage588en_US
dc.identifier.endpage595en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10266-020-00481-4en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster