The Experts below are selected from a list of 9396 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Santiago Gonzalezlopez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effect of two immediate dentin sealing approaches on bond strength of lava cad cam Indirect Restoration
Materials, 2021Co-Authors: Hassan Faez Abdullah Gailani, Cristina Benavidesreyes, Maria Victoria Bolanoscarmona, Eva Roselgallardo, Purificacion Gonzalezvillafranca, Santiago GonzalezlopezAbstract:The objective of this work was to compare the micro-tensile bond strength (µTBS) of CAD/CAM (Computer-Aided Design/ Computer-Aided Manufacturing) specimens cemented with different pairing of adhesives and resin-cements using two Immediate Dentin Dealing (IDS) approaches in comparison with Delay Dentin Sealing (DDS). Coronal dentin from 108 molars were divided into nine groups (n = 12) depending on the adhesive/resin-cement (A-C) assigned. Lava™ Ultimate (4 × 10 × 10 mm) was cemented according to different strategies: IDS1(cementation after dentin sealing), DDS (dentin sealing and cementation at 2-weeks), IDS2 (immediate dentin sealing and cementation at 2-weeks). Samples were sectioned and tested until failure to determine the µTBS. Failure mode was categorized as dentin/cement (DC), at Lava™ Ultimate/cement (LC) and hybrid (H). Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests and influence of the type of failure on the µTBS by survival analysis with competing risk was explored. Mostly, µTBS values were equal or higher in IDS2 than DDS. In general, A-Cs that showed higher µTBS, have high percentages of LC failure. Survival analysis with competing risk between DC + H and LC values showed that some A-Cs would significantly increase the µTBS values for IDS2. A-Cs with the highest adhesion values showed a high percentage of fractures at the LC interface, suggesting that the adhesion at the adhesive/dentin interface would be higher.
Hassan Faez Abdullah Gailani - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effect of two immediate dentin sealing approaches on bond strength of lava cad cam Indirect Restoration
Materials, 2021Co-Authors: Hassan Faez Abdullah Gailani, Cristina Benavidesreyes, Maria Victoria Bolanoscarmona, Eva Roselgallardo, Purificacion Gonzalezvillafranca, Santiago GonzalezlopezAbstract:The objective of this work was to compare the micro-tensile bond strength (µTBS) of CAD/CAM (Computer-Aided Design/ Computer-Aided Manufacturing) specimens cemented with different pairing of adhesives and resin-cements using two Immediate Dentin Dealing (IDS) approaches in comparison with Delay Dentin Sealing (DDS). Coronal dentin from 108 molars were divided into nine groups (n = 12) depending on the adhesive/resin-cement (A-C) assigned. Lava™ Ultimate (4 × 10 × 10 mm) was cemented according to different strategies: IDS1(cementation after dentin sealing), DDS (dentin sealing and cementation at 2-weeks), IDS2 (immediate dentin sealing and cementation at 2-weeks). Samples were sectioned and tested until failure to determine the µTBS. Failure mode was categorized as dentin/cement (DC), at Lava™ Ultimate/cement (LC) and hybrid (H). Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests and influence of the type of failure on the µTBS by survival analysis with competing risk was explored. Mostly, µTBS values were equal or higher in IDS2 than DDS. In general, A-Cs that showed higher µTBS, have high percentages of LC failure. Survival analysis with competing risk between DC + H and LC values showed that some A-Cs would significantly increase the µTBS values for IDS2. A-Cs with the highest adhesion values showed a high percentage of fractures at the LC interface, suggesting that the adhesion at the adhesive/dentin interface would be higher.
Junji Tagami - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Resin Coating Technique for Protection of Pulp and Increasing Bonding in Indirect Restoration
Current Oral Health Reports, 2015Co-Authors: Toru Nikaido, Rena Takahashi, Go Inoue, Alireza Sadr, Tomohiro Takagaki, Junji TagamiAbstract:A resin coating technique has been widely advocated in recent years. A combination of a dentin bonding system and a flowable composite is applied on the exposed dentin surfaces immediately after tooth preparation and before taking the final impression. The resin coating is beneficial to both minimize pulpal irritation and enhance the bond strength of a resin cement to dentin. Recently introduced thin-film coating materials based on all-in-one adhesive technology are used for resin coating of crown Restorations. Thin-film coating materials can be applied in a single clinical procedure and followed by created a barrier-like film layer on the prepared dentin. Therefore, the resin coating technique may play an important role to protect the dentin physically, chemically, and biologically. The coating materials also have the potential to cover exposed sound enamel and dentin, leading to maximum tooth structure preservation.
Antonio Apicella - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
inlay shading effect on the photopolymerization kinetic of a dental composite material used as bonding system in an Indirect Restoration technique
Dental Materials, 2005Co-Authors: Michele Simeone, Sandro Rengo, Alessandro Lanza, Raffaella Aversa, Davide Apicella, Antonio ApicellaAbstract:Summary Objectives : To define the inlay shading effect on the polymerization levels and kinetics of a light activated bonding system for an Indirect Restoration technique. Materials and methods : For the bonding system, an adhesive: Excite (Ivoclar-vivadent) and a composite: Z250 (3M-ESPE, St Paul Minnesota, USA) were investigated. A Demetron (Kerr USA) light curing unit was used. The composite inlay blocks of 2 mm thick were used for the experiment (Artglass A2 Heraeus, Kulzer, Dormagen, Germany). The bonding composite was photocured using a 2 mm composite inlay block as a shielding system while the adhesive was shielded by a 2.3 mm thick wafer, composed of the inlay material and the previously cured bonding composite. The kinetics and levels of polymerization were measured by a differential scanning calorimeter technique (DSC 25, Mettler, Orange, CA, Toledoh, kusnacht, switzerland). Results : The inlay shielded dental composite reaches a significantly lower level of polymerization compared to the unshielded composite. Inlay shielded composite, has a slower polymerization kinetic compared to unshielded composite. The resin adhesive shielded by the inlay-composite wafer reaches polymerization values not significantly different from those of the unshielded adhesive. Significances The degree of cure of the light-cured composite resins for use as a base for Indirect composite Restorations, may be severely reduced as a result of inlay shielding.
Cristina Benavidesreyes - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effect of two immediate dentin sealing approaches on bond strength of lava cad cam Indirect Restoration
Materials, 2021Co-Authors: Hassan Faez Abdullah Gailani, Cristina Benavidesreyes, Maria Victoria Bolanoscarmona, Eva Roselgallardo, Purificacion Gonzalezvillafranca, Santiago GonzalezlopezAbstract:The objective of this work was to compare the micro-tensile bond strength (µTBS) of CAD/CAM (Computer-Aided Design/ Computer-Aided Manufacturing) specimens cemented with different pairing of adhesives and resin-cements using two Immediate Dentin Dealing (IDS) approaches in comparison with Delay Dentin Sealing (DDS). Coronal dentin from 108 molars were divided into nine groups (n = 12) depending on the adhesive/resin-cement (A-C) assigned. Lava™ Ultimate (4 × 10 × 10 mm) was cemented according to different strategies: IDS1(cementation after dentin sealing), DDS (dentin sealing and cementation at 2-weeks), IDS2 (immediate dentin sealing and cementation at 2-weeks). Samples were sectioned and tested until failure to determine the µTBS. Failure mode was categorized as dentin/cement (DC), at Lava™ Ultimate/cement (LC) and hybrid (H). Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests and influence of the type of failure on the µTBS by survival analysis with competing risk was explored. Mostly, µTBS values were equal or higher in IDS2 than DDS. In general, A-Cs that showed higher µTBS, have high percentages of LC failure. Survival analysis with competing risk between DC + H and LC values showed that some A-Cs would significantly increase the µTBS values for IDS2. A-Cs with the highest adhesion values showed a high percentage of fractures at the LC interface, suggesting that the adhesion at the adhesive/dentin interface would be higher.
