Comparison of the clinical efficacy of two different types of post systems which were restored with composite restorations

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorAyna, Buket
dc.contributor.authorAyna, Emrah
dc.contributor.authorCelenk, Sema
dc.contributor.authorBasaran, Emine Goncu
dc.contributor.authorYilmaz, Berivan Dundar
dc.contributor.authorTacir, Ibrahim Halil
dc.contributor.authorTuncer, Mehmet Cudi
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:15:17Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:15:17Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractAIM To compare the efficacy of resin composite restorations, retained with either polyethylene or zirconia-rich glass fiber posts. METHODS Sixty-two single rooted maxillary and mandibular central incisor teeth in forty-four patients (15 males and 29 females; age range 15-32 years) were restored either with an ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWP) fiber post (Bondable Reinforcement Ribbon, DENSE, Ribbond, Seattle, WA, United States) or a zircon-rich glass fiber post (Snowpost, Lot H 040; Carbotech, Ganges, France). Then, direct resin composite restoration (Clearfil AP-X, Kuraray) was performed for both post systems in tooth color suitable. Patients were recalled for routine inspections at 6 mo, 1, 2 and 3 years. RESULTS The restorations were assessed during each recall evaluation according to predetermined clinical and radiographic criteria (periapical lesion; marginal leakage and integrity; color stability; surface stain and loss of retention of the post or the composite buildup material). The follow-up data showed no significant difference in these criteria between polyethylene fibre posts and zirconia-rich glass fibre posts. CONCLUSION The efficacy of resin composite restorations, retained with either polyethylene or zirconia-rich glass fiber posts were similar, suggesting that both types of fiber post can be used successfully to help retain resin composite restorations.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.12998/wjcc.v6.i3.27
dc.identifier.endpage34en_US
dc.identifier.issn2307-8960
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.pmid29564355
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85052279901
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/A
dc.identifier.startpage27en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v6.i3.27
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/18403
dc.identifier.volume6en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000427472700002
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBaishideng Publishing Group Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofWorld Journal of Clinical Cases
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectPolyethylene Fiberen_US
dc.subjectZircon-Rich Glass Fiberen_US
dc.subjectDirect Compositeen_US
dc.titleComparison of the clinical efficacy of two different types of post systems which were restored with composite restorationsen_US
dc.titleComparison of the clinical efficacy of two different types of post systems which were restored with composite restorations
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu