Luma Baban - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Luma Baban

Research paper thumbnail of The effect of light Restorative Dentistry The effect of light curing tip distance on the curing depth of bulk fill resin based composites

Background: This in vitro study measure and compare the effect of light curing tip distance on th... more Background: This in vitro study measure and compare the effect of light curing tip distance on the depth of cure by measuring vickers microhardness value on two recently launched bulk fill resin based composites Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Surefil SDR Flow with 4 mm thickness in comparison to Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative with 2 mm thickness. In addition, measure and compare the bottom to top microhardness ratio with different light curing tip distances. Materials and Method: One hundred fifty composite specimens were obtained from two cylindrical plastic molds the first one for bulk fill composites (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Surefil SDR Flow) with 4 mm diameter and 4 mm depth, the second one for Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative with 4 mm diameter and 2 mm depth. Each spcimen was light-cured using WOODPECKER LED CURING LIGHT for 20 sec. Polymerization was performed with the light tip positioned in direct contact, 2 mm, 4 mm, 6 mm and 8 mm distant from the top surface of t...

Research paper thumbnail of Evaluation of the effect of intermediate agents on the shear bond strength of repaired aged silorane resin composite

Journal of baghdad college of dentistry, 2012

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the bonding effect of different intermediate ag... more Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the bonding effect of different intermediate agents on the bond strength of silorane resin composite (FiltekTM P90,3M ESPE) that repaired by either silorane (FiltekTM P90) or methacrylate based resin composite (FiltekTM Z250,3M ESPE) Materials and Methods: Eighty specimens of resin composite prepared by filling silorane (FiltekTM P90) into a retentive cavity (6mm in diameter and 2mm in depth) of acrylic mold. The composite were polymerized, water stored at 37°C for one week. Their surface were finished with medium (violet) super-snap disks then rinsed in ultrasonic cleaner. Repair was performed with either silorane (FiltekTM P90) or methacrylate based composite (FiltekTM Z250) by using several intermediate agents which include (P90 System Adhesive, Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose and Clearfil repair kit).The shear bond strength (crosshead speed 0.5 mm/min) was measured after an additional water storage of 24 hour. Results: Statistical ...

Research paper thumbnail of The influence of flowable composite liner on microleakageof class II packable composite resin restoration withdifferent application techniques (Comparative study)

Journal of baghdad college of dentistry, 2012

Background: This in vitro study was conducted to evaluate and compare the influence of flowable c... more Background: This in vitro study was conducted to evaluate and compare the influence of flowable composite and different application techniques of class II packable composite restoration on dentinal leakage. Materials and methods: Thirty human freshly-extracted Maxillary premolars were selected for this study. Conventional Class II MOD cavities were prepared in the sample teeth which were then divided into five groups .Each group consist of ten boxes either MO or DO according to the restorative procedure used except group A which consist of twenty boxes(ten teeth with MOD amalgam restoration). Group A: ten teeth where restored by amalgam- (SDI Australia) high strength admix amalgam type.Group B: ten teeth in which the mesio-occlusal (MO) sides were restored by {adhesive + flowable composite + one bulk packable composite (Filtek P60)}. Group C: ten teeth in which the disto-occlusal (DO) sides were restored by {adhesive +one bulk packable composite, (Filtek P60)}.Group D: ten teeth in ...

Research paper thumbnail of Fracture resistance of Restorative Dentistry 7 Fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with extensive MOD cavities restored with different composite restorations ( An In vitro study )

Background: This in vitro study evaluated the fracture resistance of weakened endodontically trea... more Background: This in vitro study evaluated the fracture resistance of weakened endodontically treated premolars with class II MOD cavities restored with different composite restorations (Low-shrinkage Filtek P90, nanohybrid Filtek Z250 XT and SDR bulk fill). The type and mode of fracture were also assessed for all the experimental groups. Materials and Method: Fifty human adult maxillary premolar teeth were selected for this study. Standardized extensive class II MOD cavities with endodontic treatment were prepared for all teeth, except those that were saved as intact control. The teeth were divided into five groups of ten teeth each (n=10): (Group 1) intact control group, (Group 2) unrestored teeth with endodontic treatment, (Group 3) restored with (Filtek Z250 XT), (Group 4) restored with SDR bulk-fill flowable composite and (Group 5) restored with Filtek P90 composite. All specimens were subjected to compressive axial loading until fracture in a universal testing machine. The data...

Research paper thumbnail of Fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with extensive MOD cavities restored with different composite formulations

Fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with extensive MOD cavities restored with... more Fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with extensive MOD cavities restored with different composite formulations (An In vitro Study) A thesis submitted to the Council of the College of Dentistry at the University of Baghdad, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Conservative Dentistry

Research paper thumbnail of Marginal Leakage of Amalgam and Modern Composite Materials Related to Restorative Techniques in Class II Cavity : Comparative Study

Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry, 2013

Background: Restoration of the gingival margin of Class II cavities with composite resin continue... more Background: Restoration of the gingival margin of Class II cavities with composite resin continues to be problematic, especially where no enamel exists for bonding to the gingival margin. The aim of study is to evaluate the marginal leakage at enamel and cementum margin of class II MOD cavities using amalgam restoration and modern composite restorations Filtek™ P90, Filtek™ Z250 XT (Nano Hybrid Universal Restorative) and SDR bulk fill with different restoratives techniques. Materials and method: Eighty sound maxillary first premolar teeth were collected and divided into two main groups, enamel group and cementum group (40 teeth) for each group. The enamel group was prepared with standardized Class II MOD cavity with gingival margin (1 mm above C.E.J) on both box sides. While the cementum group with the gingival margin (1 mm below C.E.J) on both sides. The enamel and cementum groups were then subdivided into eight subgroups for each (five teeth) with 10 boxes for each group. Subgroups within the main group named according to materials and techniques that were used with it as following: Amalgam subgroup (Permite, SDI), SDR subgroup (DENTSPLY) with bulk technique, Filtek™ P90 subgroup (3M ESPE) with three incremental techniques (Oblique, Horizontal and Centripetal technique), and Filtek™ Z250XT subgroup (3M ESPE) with three incremental techniques (Oblique, Horizontal and Centripetal technique).After specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 7 days. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling at (5° to 55 °C). Microleakage was evaluated by stereomicroscope (20 X). Data were analyzed statistically by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test. Result: All experimental groups showed leakage at cementum more than enamel groups. SDR bulk fill subgroup showed the highest marginal leakage among all experimental groups followed by Filtek™ Z250 XT subgroup with horizontal technique at both enamel and cementum groups. Silorane and Filtek™ Z250 XT subgroups with oblique technique showed the least marginal leakage followed by centripetal technique at both enamel and cementum groups. Amalgam restoration subgroup shows lesser leakage than SDR bulk fills subgroup significantly at both enamel and cementum groups. While it show higher leakage than Silorane subgroup with oblique technique significantly at enamel margin only. Conclusion: The limiting factors for marginal leakage are technique and material dependent.

Research paper thumbnail of Fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular first molars with conservative access cavity and different restorative techniques: An in vitro study

Australian Endodontic Journal, 2016

The aim was to investigate in vitro the fracture resistance (FR) of endodontically treated teeth ... more The aim was to investigate in vitro the fracture resistance (FR) of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with conservative access cavity restored using various direct and indirect restorative materials and techniques. Seventy-two mandibular first molars were equally divided into six groups. Teeth in Group 1 were untreated (controls). In Groups 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, teeth were restored with amalgam, composite resin, ceramic inlay, ceramic onlay and zirconium crown, respectively. A fracture test was performed on all teeth using a static load. Compared with other groups, teeth in Groups 3 (P < 0.05) and 6 (P < 0.05) had the highest FR values with no significant difference in-between them. Teeth in Group 4 had the lowest FR than other groups (P < 0.05). All restorative techniques tested led to a significant reduction in FR. It is necessary to consider type of fracture when evaluating fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. Crowned molars had the highest favourable fractures among the five treatment groups. Although the results of this in vitro study showed variations between tested techniques in ETT with a conservative access cavity, further long-term controlled clinical trials are required to confirm these in vitro findings.

Research paper thumbnail of The Effect of Light Curing Tip Distance on the Curing Depth of Bulk Fill Resin Based Composites

Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry, 2014

Background: This in vitro study measure and compare the effect of light curing tip distance on th... more Background: This in vitro study measure and compare the effect of light curing tip distance on the depth of cure by measuring vickers microhardness value on two recently launched bulk fill resin based composites Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Surefil SDR Flow with 4 mm thickness in comparison to Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative with 2 mm thickness. In addition, measure and compare the bottom to top microhardness ratio with different light curing tip distances. Materials and Method: One hundred fifty composite specimens were obtained from two cylindrical plastic molds the first one for bulk fill composites (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Surefil SDR Flow) with 4 mm diameter and 4 mm depth, the second one for Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative with 4 mm diameter and 2 mm depth. Each spcimen was light-cured using WOODPECKER LED CURING LIGHT for 20 sec. Polymerization was performed with the light tip positioned in direct contact, 2 mm, 4 mm, 6 mm and 8 mm distant from the top surface of the sample. After one day of storage in distilled water in a light proof container at 37˚C, the hardness on the bottom and top surfaces of each specimen was tested using the Digital Micro Vickers Hardness Tester. Then the Data were analyzed statistically by ANOVA test, LSD test and t-test. Results: All experimental groups show top microhardness higher than bottom microhardness with high significant difference with all light tip distances. At 0 mm light tip distance all groups give the highest microhardness value. Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative shows accepted bottom to top microhardness ratio at all light tip distances. Surefil SDR Flow shows accepted bottom to top ratio only at 0, 2 and 4mm light tip distances while Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill shows the bottom to top microhardness ratio less than the accepted value with all light tip distances. Conclusion: From the results of this study we can conclude that the polymerization of bulk fill composite depends greatly on the distance from light curing tip, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill composite not recommended to be used as bulk fill restoration in deep cavities and need further studies, while Surefil SDR Flow not recommended to be used in deep cavity when curing tip distance (6-8 mm), in addition we can conclude that the thickness of the increments is more important than light curing tip distance.

Research paper thumbnail of The effect of light Restorative Dentistry The effect of light curing tip distance on the curing depth of bulk fill resin based composites

Background: This in vitro study measure and compare the effect of light curing tip distance on th... more Background: This in vitro study measure and compare the effect of light curing tip distance on the depth of cure by measuring vickers microhardness value on two recently launched bulk fill resin based composites Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Surefil SDR Flow with 4 mm thickness in comparison to Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative with 2 mm thickness. In addition, measure and compare the bottom to top microhardness ratio with different light curing tip distances. Materials and Method: One hundred fifty composite specimens were obtained from two cylindrical plastic molds the first one for bulk fill composites (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Surefil SDR Flow) with 4 mm diameter and 4 mm depth, the second one for Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative with 4 mm diameter and 2 mm depth. Each spcimen was light-cured using WOODPECKER LED CURING LIGHT for 20 sec. Polymerization was performed with the light tip positioned in direct contact, 2 mm, 4 mm, 6 mm and 8 mm distant from the top surface of t...

Research paper thumbnail of Evaluation of the effect of intermediate agents on the shear bond strength of repaired aged silorane resin composite

Journal of baghdad college of dentistry, 2012

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the bonding effect of different intermediate ag... more Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the bonding effect of different intermediate agents on the bond strength of silorane resin composite (FiltekTM P90,3M ESPE) that repaired by either silorane (FiltekTM P90) or methacrylate based resin composite (FiltekTM Z250,3M ESPE) Materials and Methods: Eighty specimens of resin composite prepared by filling silorane (FiltekTM P90) into a retentive cavity (6mm in diameter and 2mm in depth) of acrylic mold. The composite were polymerized, water stored at 37°C for one week. Their surface were finished with medium (violet) super-snap disks then rinsed in ultrasonic cleaner. Repair was performed with either silorane (FiltekTM P90) or methacrylate based composite (FiltekTM Z250) by using several intermediate agents which include (P90 System Adhesive, Adper Scotchbond Multipurpose and Clearfil repair kit).The shear bond strength (crosshead speed 0.5 mm/min) was measured after an additional water storage of 24 hour. Results: Statistical ...

Research paper thumbnail of The influence of flowable composite liner on microleakageof class II packable composite resin restoration withdifferent application techniques (Comparative study)

Journal of baghdad college of dentistry, 2012

Background: This in vitro study was conducted to evaluate and compare the influence of flowable c... more Background: This in vitro study was conducted to evaluate and compare the influence of flowable composite and different application techniques of class II packable composite restoration on dentinal leakage. Materials and methods: Thirty human freshly-extracted Maxillary premolars were selected for this study. Conventional Class II MOD cavities were prepared in the sample teeth which were then divided into five groups .Each group consist of ten boxes either MO or DO according to the restorative procedure used except group A which consist of twenty boxes(ten teeth with MOD amalgam restoration). Group A: ten teeth where restored by amalgam- (SDI Australia) high strength admix amalgam type.Group B: ten teeth in which the mesio-occlusal (MO) sides were restored by {adhesive + flowable composite + one bulk packable composite (Filtek P60)}. Group C: ten teeth in which the disto-occlusal (DO) sides were restored by {adhesive +one bulk packable composite, (Filtek P60)}.Group D: ten teeth in ...

Research paper thumbnail of Fracture resistance of Restorative Dentistry 7 Fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with extensive MOD cavities restored with different composite restorations ( An In vitro study )

Background: This in vitro study evaluated the fracture resistance of weakened endodontically trea... more Background: This in vitro study evaluated the fracture resistance of weakened endodontically treated premolars with class II MOD cavities restored with different composite restorations (Low-shrinkage Filtek P90, nanohybrid Filtek Z250 XT and SDR bulk fill). The type and mode of fracture were also assessed for all the experimental groups. Materials and Method: Fifty human adult maxillary premolar teeth were selected for this study. Standardized extensive class II MOD cavities with endodontic treatment were prepared for all teeth, except those that were saved as intact control. The teeth were divided into five groups of ten teeth each (n=10): (Group 1) intact control group, (Group 2) unrestored teeth with endodontic treatment, (Group 3) restored with (Filtek Z250 XT), (Group 4) restored with SDR bulk-fill flowable composite and (Group 5) restored with Filtek P90 composite. All specimens were subjected to compressive axial loading until fracture in a universal testing machine. The data...

Research paper thumbnail of Fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with extensive MOD cavities restored with different composite formulations

Fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with extensive MOD cavities restored with... more Fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with extensive MOD cavities restored with different composite formulations (An In vitro Study) A thesis submitted to the Council of the College of Dentistry at the University of Baghdad, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Conservative Dentistry

Research paper thumbnail of Marginal Leakage of Amalgam and Modern Composite Materials Related to Restorative Techniques in Class II Cavity : Comparative Study

Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry, 2013

Background: Restoration of the gingival margin of Class II cavities with composite resin continue... more Background: Restoration of the gingival margin of Class II cavities with composite resin continues to be problematic, especially where no enamel exists for bonding to the gingival margin. The aim of study is to evaluate the marginal leakage at enamel and cementum margin of class II MOD cavities using amalgam restoration and modern composite restorations Filtek™ P90, Filtek™ Z250 XT (Nano Hybrid Universal Restorative) and SDR bulk fill with different restoratives techniques. Materials and method: Eighty sound maxillary first premolar teeth were collected and divided into two main groups, enamel group and cementum group (40 teeth) for each group. The enamel group was prepared with standardized Class II MOD cavity with gingival margin (1 mm above C.E.J) on both box sides. While the cementum group with the gingival margin (1 mm below C.E.J) on both sides. The enamel and cementum groups were then subdivided into eight subgroups for each (five teeth) with 10 boxes for each group. Subgroups within the main group named according to materials and techniques that were used with it as following: Amalgam subgroup (Permite, SDI), SDR subgroup (DENTSPLY) with bulk technique, Filtek™ P90 subgroup (3M ESPE) with three incremental techniques (Oblique, Horizontal and Centripetal technique), and Filtek™ Z250XT subgroup (3M ESPE) with three incremental techniques (Oblique, Horizontal and Centripetal technique).After specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 7 days. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling at (5° to 55 °C). Microleakage was evaluated by stereomicroscope (20 X). Data were analyzed statistically by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-test. Result: All experimental groups showed leakage at cementum more than enamel groups. SDR bulk fill subgroup showed the highest marginal leakage among all experimental groups followed by Filtek™ Z250 XT subgroup with horizontal technique at both enamel and cementum groups. Silorane and Filtek™ Z250 XT subgroups with oblique technique showed the least marginal leakage followed by centripetal technique at both enamel and cementum groups. Amalgam restoration subgroup shows lesser leakage than SDR bulk fills subgroup significantly at both enamel and cementum groups. While it show higher leakage than Silorane subgroup with oblique technique significantly at enamel margin only. Conclusion: The limiting factors for marginal leakage are technique and material dependent.

Research paper thumbnail of Fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular first molars with conservative access cavity and different restorative techniques: An in vitro study

Australian Endodontic Journal, 2016

The aim was to investigate in vitro the fracture resistance (FR) of endodontically treated teeth ... more The aim was to investigate in vitro the fracture resistance (FR) of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with conservative access cavity restored using various direct and indirect restorative materials and techniques. Seventy-two mandibular first molars were equally divided into six groups. Teeth in Group 1 were untreated (controls). In Groups 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, teeth were restored with amalgam, composite resin, ceramic inlay, ceramic onlay and zirconium crown, respectively. A fracture test was performed on all teeth using a static load. Compared with other groups, teeth in Groups 3 (P < 0.05) and 6 (P < 0.05) had the highest FR values with no significant difference in-between them. Teeth in Group 4 had the lowest FR than other groups (P < 0.05). All restorative techniques tested led to a significant reduction in FR. It is necessary to consider type of fracture when evaluating fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. Crowned molars had the highest favourable fractures among the five treatment groups. Although the results of this in vitro study showed variations between tested techniques in ETT with a conservative access cavity, further long-term controlled clinical trials are required to confirm these in vitro findings.

Research paper thumbnail of The Effect of Light Curing Tip Distance on the Curing Depth of Bulk Fill Resin Based Composites

Journal of Baghdad College of Dentistry, 2014

Background: This in vitro study measure and compare the effect of light curing tip distance on th... more Background: This in vitro study measure and compare the effect of light curing tip distance on the depth of cure by measuring vickers microhardness value on two recently launched bulk fill resin based composites Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Surefil SDR Flow with 4 mm thickness in comparison to Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative with 2 mm thickness. In addition, measure and compare the bottom to top microhardness ratio with different light curing tip distances. Materials and Method: One hundred fifty composite specimens were obtained from two cylindrical plastic molds the first one for bulk fill composites (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Surefil SDR Flow) with 4 mm diameter and 4 mm depth, the second one for Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative with 4 mm diameter and 2 mm depth. Each spcimen was light-cured using WOODPECKER LED CURING LIGHT for 20 sec. Polymerization was performed with the light tip positioned in direct contact, 2 mm, 4 mm, 6 mm and 8 mm distant from the top surface of the sample. After one day of storage in distilled water in a light proof container at 37˚C, the hardness on the bottom and top surfaces of each specimen was tested using the Digital Micro Vickers Hardness Tester. Then the Data were analyzed statistically by ANOVA test, LSD test and t-test. Results: All experimental groups show top microhardness higher than bottom microhardness with high significant difference with all light tip distances. At 0 mm light tip distance all groups give the highest microhardness value. Filtek Z250 Universal Restorative shows accepted bottom to top microhardness ratio at all light tip distances. Surefil SDR Flow shows accepted bottom to top ratio only at 0, 2 and 4mm light tip distances while Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill shows the bottom to top microhardness ratio less than the accepted value with all light tip distances. Conclusion: From the results of this study we can conclude that the polymerization of bulk fill composite depends greatly on the distance from light curing tip, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill composite not recommended to be used as bulk fill restoration in deep cavities and need further studies, while Surefil SDR Flow not recommended to be used in deep cavity when curing tip distance (6-8 mm), in addition we can conclude that the thickness of the increments is more important than light curing tip distance.