| People | Locations | Statistics |
|---|---|---|
| Naji, M. |
| |
| Motta, Antonella |
| |
| Aletan, Dirar |
| |
| Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
| Ertürk, Emre |
| |
| Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
| Kononenko, Denys |
| |
| Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
| Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
| Bih, L. |
| |
| Casati, R. |
| |
| Muller, Hermance |
| |
| Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
| Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
| Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
| Azam, Siraj |
| |
| Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
| Blanpain, Bart |
| |
| Ali, M. A. |
| |
| Popa, V. |
| |
| Rančić, M. |
| |
| Ollier, Nadège |
| |
| Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
| Landes, Michael |
| |
| Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Torres, Orlanda
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (13/13 displayed)
- 2024The impact of inorganic fillers, organic content, and polymerization mode on the degree of conversion of monomers in resin-matrix cements for restorative dentistry: a scoping reviewcitations
- 2024Light transmittance through resin-matrix composite onlays adhered to resin-matrix cements or flowable compositescitations
- 2024Light transmittance through resin-matrix composite onlays adhered to resin-matrix cements or flowable compositescitations
- 2023Microscopic inspection of the adhesive interface of composite onlays after cementation on low loading: an in vitro studycitations
- 2023A scoping review on the polymerization of resin-matrix cements used in restorative dentistrycitations
- 2023Effect of inorganic fillers on the light transmission through traditional or flowable resin-matrix composites for restorative dentistrycitations
- 2023Microscopic inspection of the adhesive interface of composite onlays after cementation on low loadingcitations
- 2023Microscopic inspection of the adhesive interface of composite onlays after cementation on low loading:an in vitro studycitations
- 2022The influence of inorganic fillers on the light transmission through resin-matrix composites during the light-curing procedurecitations
- 2022Relationship between the inorganic content and the polymerization of the organic matrix of resin composites for dentistry: a narrative review ; Correlação entre o conteúdo inorgânico e a polimerização da matriz orgânica das resinas compostas para restaurações dentárias: uma revisão narrativacitations
- 2022The influence of inorganic fillers on the light transmission through resin-matrix composites during the light-curing procedure: an integrative reviewcitations
- 2021The effect of different dietary and therapeutic solutions on the color stability of resin-matrix composites used in dentistrycitations
- 2021Damage of dental amalgam and resin-matrix composite surfaces after exposure to bleaching agentscitations
Places of action
| Organizations | Location | People |
|---|
article
Microscopic inspection of the adhesive interface of composite onlays after cementation on low loading
Abstract
<p>Purpose: This study aimed to assess the layer thickness and microstructure of traditional resin-matrix cements and flowable resin-matrix composites at dentin and enamel to composite onlay interfaces after cementation on low loading magnitude. Materials and Methods: Twenty teeth were prepared and conditioned with an adhesive system for restoration with resin-matrix composite onlays manufactured by CAD-CAM. On cementation, tooth-to-onlay assemblies were distributed into four groups, including two traditional resin-matrix cements (groups M and B), one flowable resin-matrix composite (group G), and one thermally induced flowable composite (group V). After the cementation procedure, assemblies were cross-sectioned for inspection by optical microscopy at different magnification up to ×1000. Results: The layer thickness of resin-matrix cementation showed the highest mean values at around 405 µm for a traditional resin-matrix cement (group B). The thermally induced flowable resin-matrix composites showed the lowest layer thickness values. The resin-matrix layer thickness revealed statistical differences between traditional resin cement (groups M and B) and flowable resin-matrix composites (groups V and G) (p < 0.05). However, the groups of flowable resin-matrix composites did not reveal statistical differences (p < 0.05). The thickness of the adhesive system layer at around 7 µm and 12 µm was lower at the interfaces with flowable resin-matrix composites when compared to the adhesive layer at resin-matrix cements, which ranged from 12 µm up to 40 µm. Conclusions: The flowable resin-matrix composites showed adequate flowing even though the loading on cementation was performed at low magnitude. Nevertheless, significant variation in thickness of the cementation layer was noticed for flowable resin-matrix composites and traditional resin-matrix cements that can occur in chair-side procedures due to the clinical sensitivity and differences in rheological properties of the materials.</p>