Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2113489851> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 79 of
79
with 100 items per page.
- W2113489851 endingPage "170" @default.
- W2113489851 startingPage "164" @default.
- W2113489851 abstract "ABSTRACT Aim To compare the retention of amalgam restorations in bonded amalgam restoration and restorations with undercuts. Background With improvement in adhesive technology problem associated with conventional preparation for amalgam restorations mainly compromised resistance form of tooth structure have been largely overcome. Materials and methods Forty caries free extracted molars were used. A basic box preparation was done proximally with buccoproximal and linguoproximal walls diverging at 45° angle and the axial wall is 1.3 mm in dentin. Group 1 – Teeth with basic box preparation. Group 2 – Teeth with box preparation for bonded amalgam. Group 3 – Teeth with box preparation and proximal retention grooves. Group 4 – Teeth with box preparation and occlusal dovetail. Group 1, 3 and 4 were restored with silver amalgam and group 2 restored with resin-bonded amalgam. All samples were subjected to simulated occlusal load against marginal ridge using a blunt stainless steel point in an Instron testing machine. The force in kilogram required to dislodge the restorations as well as the type and location of failure were recorded. Result The main force required to dislodge the restoration was least in group 1 and 3 and maximum in group 2. Conclusion The in vitro study showed that the amalgam bonding technique, using an adhesive resin liner in proximal box form preparation, was more effective than either box form with proximal grooves or dovetails or proximal box only in providing resistance to displacement. Clinical significance Amalgam bonding eliminates the unnecessary removal of sound tooth structure during cavity preparations. How to cite this article Gupta I, Gupta S, Kothari A. Revisiting Amalgam: A Comparative Study between Bonded Amalgam Restoration and Amalgam Retained with Undercuts. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(3):164-170." @default.
- W2113489851 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2113489851 creator A5000965201 @default.
- W2113489851 creator A5031837438 @default.
- W2113489851 creator A5057087827 @default.
- W2113489851 date "2011-01-01" @default.
- W2113489851 modified "2023-09-30" @default.
- W2113489851 title "Revisiting Amalgam: A Comparative Study between Bonded Amalgam Restoration and Amalgam Retained with Undercuts" @default.
- W2113489851 cites W1964732443 @default.
- W2113489851 cites W1971084956 @default.
- W2113489851 cites W1990513513 @default.
- W2113489851 cites W2001839970 @default.
- W2113489851 cites W2021695172 @default.
- W2113489851 cites W2030805831 @default.
- W2113489851 cites W2069506224 @default.
- W2113489851 cites W2091176338 @default.
- W2113489851 cites W2092763511 @default.
- W2113489851 doi "https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1028" @default.
- W2113489851 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22186810" @default.
- W2113489851 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
- W2113489851 type Work @default.
- W2113489851 sameAs 2113489851 @default.
- W2113489851 citedByCount "1" @default.
- W2113489851 countsByYear W21134898512013 @default.
- W2113489851 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2113489851 hasAuthorship W2113489851A5000965201 @default.
- W2113489851 hasAuthorship W2113489851A5031837438 @default.
- W2113489851 hasAuthorship W2113489851A5057087827 @default.
- W2113489851 hasBestOaLocation W21134898511 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C130907195 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C147789679 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C159985019 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C17525397 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C199343813 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C202271784 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C2779227376 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C2779263046 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C29694066 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C51795115 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C68928338 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C130907195 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C147789679 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C159985019 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C17525397 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C185592680 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C192562407 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C199343813 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C202271784 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C2779227376 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C2779263046 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C29694066 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C51795115 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C68928338 @default.
- W2113489851 hasConceptScore W2113489851C71924100 @default.
- W2113489851 hasIssue "3" @default.
- W2113489851 hasLocation W21134898511 @default.
- W2113489851 hasLocation W21134898512 @default.
- W2113489851 hasOpenAccess W2113489851 @default.
- W2113489851 hasPrimaryLocation W21134898511 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W1521870959 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W2006095257 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W201845373 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W2163484258 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W2354481634 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W2357103835 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W2390685863 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W2414196490 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W2416406309 @default.
- W2113489851 hasRelatedWork W2938395258 @default.
- W2113489851 hasVolume "12" @default.
- W2113489851 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2113489851 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2113489851 magId "2113489851" @default.
- W2113489851 workType "article" @default.