You are in the accessibility menu

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/132286
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorReis, José Maurício dos Santos Nunes-
dc.contributor.authorJorge, Érica Gouveia-
dc.contributor.authorRibeiro, João Gustavo Rabelo-
dc.contributor.authorPinelli, Ligia Antunes Pereira-
dc.contributor.authorAbi-Rached, Filipe de Oliveira-
dc.contributor.authorTanomaru Filho, Mário-
dc.date.accessioned2015-08-06T16:13:03Z-
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-25T21:25:28Z-
dc.date.available2015-08-06T16:13:03Z-
dc.date.available2016-10-25T21:25:28Z-
dc.date.issued2012-
dc.identifierhttp://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn/2012/704246/-
dc.identifier.citationInternational Scholarly Research Network Dentistry, v. 2012, p 1-5., 2012.-
dc.identifier.issn2090-4371-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/132286-
dc.identifier.urihttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/132286-
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to evaluate the radiopacity of two conventional cements (Zinc Cement and Ketac Cem Easymix), one resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RelyX Luting 2) and six resin cements (Multilink, Bistite II DC, RelyX ARC, Fill Magic Dual Cement, Enforce and Panavia F) by digitization of images. Methods. Five disc-shaped specimens (10×1.0 mm) were made for each material, according to ISO 4049. After setting of the cements, radiographs were made using occlusal films and a graduated aluminum stepwedge varying from 1.0 to 16 mm in thickness. The radiographs were digitized, and the radiopacity of the cements was compared with the aluminum stepwedge using the software VIXWIN-2000. Data (mmAl) were submitted to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (=0.05). Results. The Zinc Cement was the most radiopaque material tested (<0.05). The resin cements presented higher radiopacity (<0.05) than the conventional (Ketac Cem Easymix) or resin-modified glass ionomer (RelyX Luting 2) cements, except for the Fill Magic Dual Cement and Enforce. The Multilink presented the highest radiopacity (<0.05) among the resin cements. Conclusion. The glass ionomer-based cements (Ketac Cem Easymix and RelyX Luting 2) and the resin cements (Fill Magic Dual Cement and Enforce) showed lower radiopacity values than the minimum recommended by the ISO standard.en
dc.format.extent1-5-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.sourceCurrículo Lattes-
dc.subjectRadiopacidadeen
dc.subjectCimento odontológicoen
dc.titleRadiopacity evaluation of contemporary luting cements by digitization of imagesen
dc.typeoutro-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Vale do Rio Verde (UNINCOR)-
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Departamento de Materiais Odontológicos e Prótese, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara, Araraquara, Rua Humaitá, 1680, Centro, CEP 14801903, SP, Brasil-
dc.description.affiliationUnespUniversidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Departamento de Materiais Odontológicos e Prótese, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara, Araraquara, Rua Humaitá, 1680, Centro, CEP 14801903, SP, Brasil-
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2012/704246-
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso aberto-
dc.identifier.fileISSN2090-4371-2012-2012-01-05.pdf-
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Scholarly Research Network Dentistry-
dc.identifier.lattes455968557454133-
dc.identifier.lattes2665211298584751-
dc.identifier.lattes3644428388373889-
Appears in Collections:Artigos, TCCs, Teses e Dissertações da Unesp

There are no files associated with this item.
 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.