Publication:
Resistance to fracture of simulated external cervical resorption cavities repaired with different materials.

dc.contributor.authorArıcan, Burçin
dc.contributor.authorSesen Uslu, Yesim
dc.contributor.authorSarıalioğlu Güngör, Ayça
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-16T14:56:10Z
dc.date.available2023-05-16T14:56:10Z
dc.date.issued2023-03-31T21:00:00Z
dc.description.abstractThe aim of the study was to evaluate the fracture resistance (FR) of teeth with simulated external cervical resorption (ECR) cavities repaired with different materials. Following the shaping of the 80 human permanent maxillary central incisors, standard ECR cavities were prepared and restored with a nanohybrid composite resin; a high viscosity GIC Equia Forte Fill; Biodentine; Biodentine + nanohybrid composite resin; MTA BIOREP; MTA BIOREP + nanohybrid composite resin. Then, the root canals were obturated with AH Plus and gutta-percha. The roots were embedded acrylic resin blocks and fracture strength test was applied. The highest FR was observed in the Biodentine group, while the lowest was in Equia group (p < 0.05). No significant results were observed among composite, Biodentine + composite, MTA BIOREP + composite and MTA BIOREP (p > 0.05). Biodentine may be a preferable material for repairing ECR cavities. Adding a composite layer on MTA BIOREP and Biodentine did not improve the FR of these materials.
dc.identifier.pubmed36354094
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12645/37885
dc.language.isoen
dc.subjectcalcium silicate
dc.subjectexternal cervical resorption
dc.subjectfracture resistance
dc.titleResistance to fracture of simulated external cervical resorption cavities repaired with different materials.
dspace.entity.typePublication
Files