Yayın:
A comparison of the effects of incremental and snowplow techniques on the mechanical properties of composite restorations

dc.contributor.authorUs, Y. Olcer
dc.contributor.authorAydinoglu, A.
dc.contributor.authorErsahan, S.
dc.contributor.authorHepsenoglu, Y. Erdem
dc.contributor.authorSagir, K.
dc.contributor.authorUsumez, A.
dc.date.accessioned2026-06-27T14:55:40Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.description.abstractBackgroundGlass fibre-reinforced composite (GFRC) has the potential to enhance the mechanical properties of resin-based restorations. Nevertheless, the application technique can influence the cervical margin porosity, potentially reducing the mechanical strength of restorations.MethodsIn an in vitro setup, mould specimens underwent six different treatments to assess the effects of snowplow and incremental curing techniques on the properties of GFRC (EverX) and universal resin composite (Filtek). Mechanical properties, namely flexural strength (FS), compressive strength (CS) and Vickers hardness (VH), were evaluated following ISO 4049 standards. Data interpretation utilized the Kruskal-Wallis tests.ResultsNo significant difference emerged across groups for FS. CS in the snowplow method with lesser EverX thickness (SnPl_1) was comparable with only EverX and Filtek (P > 0.05). The CS was reduced in the snowplow technique with greater EverX thickness (SnPl_2) (P < 0.05) and further decreased with the incremental method (P < 0.001). VH results showed that EverX Posterior was consistently softer than Filtek, with specific patterns of hardness variations among different application methods.ConclusionsApplying EverX and Filtek using the snowplow technique delivers superior CS and VH for restorations in contrast to the incremental method. Utilizing the snowplow approach in high-stress areas can make restorations more fracture-resistant.en
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors would like to thank GC Europe for providing EverX Posterior composite resin.
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12982
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/adj.12982
dc.identifier.eissn1834-7819
dc.identifier.endpage48
dc.identifier.issn0045-0421
dc.identifier.issue1
dc.identifier.pubmed37814190
dc.identifier.startpage40
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14981/66319
dc.identifier.volume69
dc.identifier.wos001081282800001
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherWILEY
dc.relation.ispartofAUSTRALIAN DENTAL JOURNAL
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.subjectCompressive strength
dc.subjectflexural strength
dc.subjectglass fibre-reinforced composite
dc.subjectincremental
dc.subjectresin composite
dc.subjectrestorative composites
dc.subjectsnowplow
dc.subjectsurface roughness
dc.subjectVickers hardness
dc.subjectFIBER-REINFORCED COMPOSITE
dc.subjectLOAD-BEARING CAPACITY
dc.subjectOXYGEN INHIBITION
dc.subjectRESIN COMPOSITES
dc.subjectFRACTURE-RESISTANCE
dc.subjectCLINICAL-EVALUATION
dc.subjectSURFACE HARDNESS
dc.subjectBOND STRENGTH
dc.subjectMOLAR
dc.subjectMANAGEMENT
dc.subjectDentistry, Oral Surgery & Medicine
dc.titleA comparison of the effects of incremental and snowplow techniques on the mechanical properties of composite restorations
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.import.sourceWOS

Dosyalar

Koleksiyonlar