Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorCapar, Ismail D.
dc.contributor.authorGok, Tuba
dc.contributor.authorUysal, Banu
dc.contributor.authorKeles, Ali
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T12:26:20Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T12:26:20Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn1059-910X
dc.identifier.issn1097-0029
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.23341
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12712/10719
dc.descriptioncapar, ismail davut/0000-0002-8729-8983en_US
dc.descriptionWOS: 000478471700001en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 31313438en_US
dc.description.abstractThe aim of the study was to compare different imaging methods in the diagnosis of microcracks on root dentin and to evaluate the frequency of dentinal microcracks observed after root canal preparation using the ProTaper Universal (PTU) system of different sizes. A total of 30 mandibular molars' mesial roots were scanned with microcomputed tomography (micro-CT) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging methods before instrumentation. Root canal instrumentation was performed up to PTU F2 and F4 files. After instrumentation stages, the roots were scanned again with micro-CT and then with CBCT in same parameters. All roots were sectioned horizontally at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 mm from the apices of the specimens. The sections were imaged under a stereomicroscope. Finally, imaging of the sections was done by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Statistical data analysis of instrumentation steps was performed using Friedman and Wilcoxon tests, and the data of imaging methods were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (p = .05). Instrumentation with the PTU system up to F2 and F4 files significantly increased the number of microcracks compared with preoperative samples according to micro-CT imaging (p < .05). For detecting microcracks on the root dentin, there were no statistically significant differences between micro-CT (43.9%) and stereomicroscopy (45.8%) (p < .05). SEM showed significantly higher percentage of microcracks (88.3%) (p > .05). No microcrack was observed using the CBCT method. There were no statistically differences between micro-CT and stereomicroscopy. SEM showed more dentinal microcracks while no microcrack was observed with CBCT.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipTurkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Arastirma KurumuTurkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Arastirma Kurumu (TUBITAK) [114S809]; Scientific and Technological Research Council of TurkeyTurkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Arastirma Kurumu (TUBITAK); 3001 Starting R&D Projects Funding Programen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipTurkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Arastirma Kurumu, Grant/Award Number: 114S809; 3001 Starting R&D Projects Funding Program; Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkeyen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1002/jemt.23341en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectcone beam computed tomographyen_US
dc.subjectdentinal microcracken_US
dc.subjectmicro-computed tomographyen_US
dc.subjectscanning electron microscopyen_US
dc.subjectstereomicroscopyen_US
dc.titleComparison of microcomputed tomography, cone beam tomography, stereomicroscopy, and scanning electron microscopy techniques for detection of microcracks on root dentin and effect of different apical sizes on microcrack formationen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentOMÜen_US
dc.identifier.volume82en_US
dc.identifier.issue10en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1748en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1755en_US
dc.relation.journalMicroscopy Research and Techniqueen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster