Shear bond strength to enamel and failure type of different periodontal splints: an in vivo and in vitro study

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorKarabekiroglu, Said
dc.contributor.authorOncu, Elif
dc.contributor.authorYildiz, Merve
dc.contributor.authorUnlu, Nimet
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-23T14:17:15Z
dc.date.available2024-02-23T14:17:15Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.departmentNEÜen_US
dc.description.abstractThe goal of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength (SBS) and failure mode of four different splint materials [Polyethylene FRC Ribbond Thm (RB), Polyethylene FRC Construct (Kerr), Multifilament Fishing Line (MFL), and Non Fiber Reinforced Composite (control)]. Thirty- seven subjects were randomly divided into four splint methods. After splinting procedures, the subjects were recalled 12 months later. One hundred and sixty human mandibular incisors (for extracoronal and intracoronal splinting) and 40 sheep mandibles (only extracoronal splinting) were used for the in vitro part. The specimens were subjected to SBS at their incisoproximal contact, and debonding forces were measured with a universal testing machine (1 mm/min crosshead speed). Failure sites were examined under a stereomicroscope (x40 magnification). The SBS data were assessed via analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's tests. The survival rate was significantly affected by the splint type (RB: 95.3%, Kerr: 91.6%, MFL: 93.5%, Control: 52.5%). No statistically significant differences were found between RB, Kerr, and MFL (p > 0.05) at all in vitro parts. Intracoronal splinting showed lower SBS values than extracoronal (p < 0.05). Lower SBS values were obtained in sheep teeth than human teeth (p < 0.05). Significantly different fracture patterns were noted between groups (p < 0.05). Only resin composite application seems to be inadequate for periodontal splinting. MFL splints are also economic and quite resistant, and they might be used as an alternative to fiber- reinforced composites.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/01694243.2016.1257236
dc.identifier.endpage1385en_US
dc.identifier.issn0169-4243
dc.identifier.issn1568-5616
dc.identifier.issue12en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84996774793en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1374en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1080/01694243.2016.1257236
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12452/13020
dc.identifier.volume31en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000396772400008en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Ltden_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal Of Adhesion Science And Technologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectPeriodontal Splinten_US
dc.subjectClinical Follow-Upen_US
dc.subjectShear Bond Strengthen_US
dc.subjectFractureen_US
dc.titleShear bond strength to enamel and failure type of different periodontal splints: an in vivo and in vitro studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu