Guidelines, Supplements And Techniques Relating to KRX-0401

After 6 months, differences between test and control groups were not present on SEM images and profilometric values. CPP-ACP and fluoride cr��me had positive in vivo effects on enamel surfaces. Significant differences in surface roughness existed after a 3-week period of cr��me use. SCANNING 36:270�C277, 2014. ? 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. ""The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of various surface treatments on the shear bond strength of Y-TZP (Yttria-Tetragonal Zirconia Polycrystal) ceramics with zirconia primer and two different resin cements both containing 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen FG-4592 phosphate (MDP). Zirconia blocks (LAVA, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN) were polished and assigned to five groups according to the surface treatment: (1) no further treatment (control); (2) airborne abrasion with Al2O3 particles; (3) Z-PRIME Plus (Bisco, Schaumburg, IL) applied on polished zirconia; (4) Z-PRIME Plus applied on zirconia after airborne abrasion; and (5) tribochemical silica-coating performed with the CoJet system (3M ESPE) followed by application of ESPE?-Sil (3M ESPE). Each group was further divided into one of two Quetiapine resin cements: Panavia F2.0 (Kuraray, Kurashiki, Okayama, Japan) and Clearfil SA Luting (Kuraray). Resin cement placed inside a gel-cap was polymerized on the zirconia surface. Shear bond strength was tested with a universal testing machine at 0.5?mm/min. One-way analysis of variance and paired t-test were done. (p?this website significant differences were found between the shear bond strengths of the individual resin cements applied to zirconia surfaces treated the same way. In conclusion, the combined surface treatment of airborne abrasion followed by a zirconia primer is recommended for zirconia bonding with Panavia F2.0 and Clearfil SA Luting cements. SCANNING 36:479�C486, 2014. ? 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. ""This study was aimed to compare the cyclic fatigue resistance and torsional resistance of rotary instruments with and without surface treatment. G6 A2 (Group A2) with and G6 A2 without surface treatment after machining (Group AN) were compared in this study. ProTaper F2 (Group F2) which has similar dimension and shape was also used for comparison. To evaluate the torsional resistance, ultimate torsional strength and distortion angle until fracture were recorded, and the toughness was calculated. The cyclic fatigue resistance was compared by evaluating the number of cycles to failure in a simulated canal. Statistical analysis was performed by one-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc test (p?=?0.05).