Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://guaiaca.ufpel.edu.br:8080/handle/123456789/811
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSouza, Fábio Herrmann Coelho de-
dc.contributor.authorCamargo, Junara Cristina-
dc.contributor.authorBeskow, Thiago-
dc.contributor.authorBalestrin, Matheus Dalmolin-
dc.contributor.authorKlein Junior, Celso Afonso-
dc.contributor.authorDemarco, Flávio Fernando-
dc.date.accessioned2013-11-25T13:44:22Z-
dc.date.available2013-11-25T13:44:22Z-
dc.date.issued2012-
dc.identifier.citationSOUZA, Fábio Herrmann Coelho de; CAMARGO, Junara Cristina; BESKOW, Tiago; BALESTRIN, Matheus Dalmolin; KLEIN JÚNIOR, Celso Afonso; DEMARCO, Flávio Fernando. A randomized double-blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 1-year follow-up. Journal of Applied Oral Science (Impresso), v. 20, p. 174-179, 2012.pt_BR
dc.identifier.issn1678-7757-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/811-
dc.description.abstractObjective: This randomized double-blind clinical trial compared the performance of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel, after 1-year follow-up. Material and Methods: Thirteen volunteers requiring at least two posterior composite restorations were selected. Twenty-nine cavities were performed, comprising 14 without bevel (butt joint) and 15 with bevel preparation of the enamel cavosurface angle. All cavities were P60). A halogen light curing unit was used through the study. Restorations were polished immediately. Analysis was carried out at baseline, after 6 months and after 1 year by a calibrated evaluator (Kappa), according to the FDI criteria. Data were statistically analyzedby Mann-Whitney test (p<0.05). Results: Beveled and non-beveled cavities performed similarly after 1 year follow-up, regarding to fractures and retention, marginal adaptation,postoperative hypersensitivity, recurrence of caries, surface luster and anatomic form performance (p<0.05) than butt joint restorations. Conclusions: It was concluded that the restorations were acceptable after 1 year, but restorations placed in cavities with marginal beveling showed less marginal staining than those placed in non-beveled cavities.pt_BR
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by Darlene Silveira (souzasilveirad@yahoo.com.br) on 2013-11-25T12:40:27Z No. of bitstreams: 1 A randomized double-blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel 1-year follow-up.pdf: 1367951 bytes, checksum: d2a6fbb2386d722e26b7dc9f93b57487 (MD5)en
dc.description.provenanceApproved for entry into archive by Fabiano Malheiro(fabianomalheiro22@hotmail.com) on 2013-11-25T13:44:22Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 A randomized double-blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel 1-year follow-up.pdf: 1367951 bytes, checksum: d2a6fbb2386d722e26b7dc9f93b57487 (MD5)en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2013-11-25T13:44:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 A randomized double-blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel 1-year follow-up.pdf: 1367951 bytes, checksum: d2a6fbb2386d722e26b7dc9f93b57487 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012en
dc.language.isoen_USpt_BR
dc.publisherUniversidade de São Paulopt_BR
dc.relation.ispartofseriesv.20;n.2-
dc.subjectClinical trialpt_BR
dc.subjectComposite resinspt_BR
dc.subjectBevelpt_BR
dc.subjectDental restoration, permanentpt_BR
dc.titleA randomized double blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel 1 year follow uppt_BR
dc.typeArticlept_BR
Appears in Collections:Departamento de Odontologia Restauradora: Artigos de periódicos



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