File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-44349151011
- PMID: 18578176
- WOS: WOS:000255599600007
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Fracture resistance and microtensile bond strength of maxillary premolars restored with two resin composite inlay systems
Title | Fracture resistance and microtensile bond strength of maxillary premolars restored with two resin composite inlay systems |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2008 |
Publisher | Mosher & Linder, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.amjdent.com |
Citation | American Journal Of Dentistry, 2008, v. 21 n. 2, p. 97-100 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Purpose: To compare the in vitro fracture resistance and the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of premolar teeth restored with two light-cured resin composite inlay systems. Methods: 50 sound human maxillary premolars were divided randomly into five equal groups. Four groups received mesial-occlusal-distal (MOD) inlay preparations. Restorative treatments comprised: Group 1 (Renew direct resin composite), Group 2 (Renew direct resin composite inlay), Group 3 (Tescera indirect resin composite inlay), Group 4 (non-restored), Group 5 (intact). All teeth were loaded axially until fracture. The same resin-based materials as used in Groups 1-3 were bonded to the superficial coronal dentin of 15 teeth. Beams approximately 1.0 mm × 1.0 mm were prepared and tested in microtensile mode. Results were compared using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's multiple comparison tests. Results: Mean fracture strengths (KN): Group 1, 2.06 (0.76); Group 2, 2.30 (0.49); Group 3, 2.62 (0.68); Group 4, 1.24 (0.44); Group 5, 2.40 (0.71). Group 4 was significantly weaker that the other four groups, P< 0.01. Mean μTBSs (MPa): Group 1, 33.38 (6.24); Group 2, 20.38 (6.24); Group 3, 20.87 (4.62). Group 1 was significantly stronger than the other two groups, P< 0.01. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/66584 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 0.9 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.360 |
ISI Accession Number ID | |
References |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Sun, YS | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Chen, YM | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Smales, RJ | en_HK |
dc.contributor.author | Yip, KHK | en_HK |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-09-06T05:47:36Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2010-09-06T05:47:36Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2008 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.citation | American Journal Of Dentistry, 2008, v. 21 n. 2, p. 97-100 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.issn | 0894-8275 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/66584 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Purpose: To compare the in vitro fracture resistance and the microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of premolar teeth restored with two light-cured resin composite inlay systems. Methods: 50 sound human maxillary premolars were divided randomly into five equal groups. Four groups received mesial-occlusal-distal (MOD) inlay preparations. Restorative treatments comprised: Group 1 (Renew direct resin composite), Group 2 (Renew direct resin composite inlay), Group 3 (Tescera indirect resin composite inlay), Group 4 (non-restored), Group 5 (intact). All teeth were loaded axially until fracture. The same resin-based materials as used in Groups 1-3 were bonded to the superficial coronal dentin of 15 teeth. Beams approximately 1.0 mm × 1.0 mm were prepared and tested in microtensile mode. Results were compared using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's multiple comparison tests. Results: Mean fracture strengths (KN): Group 1, 2.06 (0.76); Group 2, 2.30 (0.49); Group 3, 2.62 (0.68); Group 4, 1.24 (0.44); Group 5, 2.40 (0.71). Group 4 was significantly weaker that the other four groups, P< 0.01. Mean μTBSs (MPa): Group 1, 33.38 (6.24); Group 2, 20.38 (6.24); Group 3, 20.87 (4.62). Group 1 was significantly stronger than the other two groups, P< 0.01. | en_HK |
dc.language | eng | en_HK |
dc.publisher | Mosher & Linder, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.amjdent.com | en_HK |
dc.relation.ispartof | American Journal of Dentistry | en_HK |
dc.title | Fracture resistance and microtensile bond strength of maxillary premolars restored with two resin composite inlay systems | en_HK |
dc.type | Article | en_HK |
dc.identifier.openurl | http://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0894-8275&volume=21&spage=97&epage=100&date=2008&atitle=Fracture+resistance+and+microtensile+bond+strength+of+maxillary+premolars+restored+with+two+resin+composite+inlay+systems. | en_HK |
dc.identifier.email | Yip, KHK: kevin.h.k.yip@hkusua.hku.hk | en_HK |
dc.identifier.authority | Yip, KHK=rp00027 | en_HK |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 18578176 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-44349151011 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 151066 | en_HK |
dc.relation.references | http://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-44349151011&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpage | en_HK |
dc.identifier.volume | 21 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.issue | 2 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.spage | 97 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.epage | 100 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000255599600007 | - |
dc.publisher.place | United States | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Sun, YS=24333186100 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Chen, YM=7601450466 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Smales, RJ=7005372382 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Yip, KHK=25423244900 | en_HK |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0894-8275 | - |