Background: The current pandemic associated with SARS-CoV-2 has negatively influenced several activities, including teaching in Operative Dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of knowledge in Operative Dentistry on undergraduate students' perception related to personal life and return to clinical practices classes during pandemic.
Materials And Methods: The present research was a cross-sectional, observational, and qualitative survey.
J Appl Oral Sci
October 2021
Objective: To evaluate non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) restored with different adhesion strategies.
Methodology: This is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, split-mouth study. An adhesive restorative system (Single Bond Universal/Filtek Z350XT - SBU) was evaluated both without and with selective enamel conditioning (E-SBU), resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (Vitremer; RMGIC), and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid pretreatment (EDTA; E-RMGIC).
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different toothpastes on the surface wear of enamel, dentin, composite resin (CR), and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), and to perform a topographic analysis of the surfaces, based on representative images generated by atomic force microscopy (AFM) after erosion-abrasion cycles.
Methodology: One hundred and forty bovine incisors were collected and divided into two groups: 72 enamel and 72 dentin blocks (4×4 mm). Half of the specimens were restored with CR (Filtek Z350 XT) and the other half with RMGIC (Fuji II LC).
Objectives: The purpose of the present prospective and randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical performance of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) restored with different adhesion strategies on the dental substrate.
Method And Materials: An adhesive restorative system (Single Bond Universal/ Z350XT) with and without selective enamel conditioning was evaluated, as well as a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Vitremer), with and without pretreatment with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Two operators placed a total of 200 restorations in 50 patients (four restorations per patient).
The aim of this study was to evaluate the mechanical resistance of dentin and restorative materials submitted to erosive/abrasive challenges with different dentifrices. The dentin was restored using a resin-modified glass-ionomer (RMGIC) or a composite resin (RC). One hemiface of the sample was protected, and the other was subdivided according to the applied dentifrice (n = 10): without fluoride (SF), sodium fluoride (NaF) and stannous fluoride (SnF).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF