Microleakage of endodontically treated teeth with different dowel systems

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorUsumez, A
dc.contributor.authorCobankara, FK
dc.contributor.authorOzturk, N
dc.contributor.authorEskitascioglu, G
dc.contributor.authorBelli, S
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-26T16:55:21Z
dc.date.available2020-03-26T16:55:21Z
dc.date.issued2004
dc.departmentSelçuk Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractStatement of problem. Several new esthetic dowel systems are available for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth, but little is known about how effectively these dowels seal the restored teeth. Purpose. The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare microleakage of 3 esthetic, adhesively luted dowel systems with a conventional dowel system. Material and methods. The root canals of 41 human intact single-rooted extracted teeth were prepared using a step-back technique. The teeth were randomly divided into 4 experimental groups (n=10), and I tooth served as a positive control. The decoronated roots were obturated with gutta-percha using lateral condensation. Roots were restored with I of the following dowel systems according to the manufacturer's instructions: (1) stainless steel dowels (ParaPost), (2) glass fiber dowels (Snowpost), (3) resin-supported polyethylene fiber (Ribbond) dowels, or (4) zirconia dowels (Cosmopost). Using a fluid filtration method, coronal leakage of the specimens along the dowel space and root canal restorative material was measured. Fluid movement measurements were made at 2-minute intervals for 8 minutes to measure the presence of voids existing in the obturated canals, at I week, 3 months, and 6 months following dowel insertion. A repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze logarithmic transformations of data (time and dowel material) for significant differences. The Tukey HSD test and paired 2-tailed tests were used to perform multiple comparisons (alpha=.05). Results. The data indicated that the leakage values varied according to the dowel system used (P<.01). There was significant interaction between dowel systems and time of testing (P<.01). The sealing ability of zirconia dowels decreased over time (P<.01), but sealing abilities of stainless steel and resin-supported polyethylene fiber dowels remained constant (P>.05). The sealing ability of glass fiber dowels increased at 3 months (P=.032) and remained constant over the next 3 months (P=.758). Statistically, resin-supported polyethylene fiber and glass fiber dowels showed the lowest coronal leakage when compared with stainless steel and zirconia dowels at all time periods (P<.01). There were no significant differences between resin-supported polyethylene fiber and glass fiber dowels at any time period. The initial leakage measurement in zirconia dowel and stainless steel dowels were similar (P=.914), but became significantly different at 3 and 6 months (P<.01). Conclusion. Resin-supported polyethylene fiber dowels and glass fiber dowels tested exhibited less microleakage compared to zirconia dowel systems. The latter system should be further evaluated because of its unacceptable level of leakage.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.05.004en_US
dc.identifier.endpage169en_US
dc.identifier.issn0022-3913en_US
dc.identifier.issn1097-6841en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.pmid15295326en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage163en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.05.004
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/19126
dc.identifier.volume92en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000223287700012en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMOSBY-ELSEVIERen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRYen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.selcuk20240510_oaigen_US
dc.titleMicroleakage of endodontically treated teeth with different dowel systemsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim
İsim:
usumez2004.pdf
Boyut:
171.49 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
İndir

Koleksiyon

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