English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Restoration of endodontically treated teeth has always been a challange. The purpose of this study is to compare the fracture strength of maxillary premolar teeth restored with two different materials (amalgam and posterior composite). In this study, 30 extracted caries free maxillary premolars were selected. The teeth were divided into three groups of 10 teeth each. The root canals of the teeth in Group 1 and 2 were enlarged to a size of 35# and obturated with gutta percha cones and AH26 root canal sealer using lateral condensation technique. Then gutta percha was removed from the root canal to 2mm below the cemento-enamel junction with a round bur. Group 1 was restored with high-copper amalgam and Group 2 was restored with posterior composite resin. The teeth in Group 3 had no treatment. A universal testing machine (Instron) was used for mechanical test. All teeth were loaded until fracture was occured. The mean force for Group 1 is 1125.40 N; for Group 2, 983.62N and for group 3, 2111.58N. No statistically significant difference was found between the group 1 and group 2 (p>0.05), however the difference between these two groups and the group 3 was significant (p<0.05).

POSTERİOR KOMPOZİT VE AMALGAMLA RESTORE EDİLMİŞ ENDODONTİK TEDAVİLİ MAKSİLLER PREMOLAR DİŞLERİN KIRILMAYA DAYANIKLILIĞI