Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: http://dspace.udla.edu.ec/handle/33000/11895
Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DC Valor Lengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.advisorÁlvarez Lalvay, Eddy Jhonny-
dc.creatorChamba Quiñónez, Alexander Paúl-
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-11T22:31:10Z-
dc.date.available2020-02-11T22:31:10Z-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.citationChamba Quiñónez, A. P. (2019). Comparación de la contracción de polimerización entre una resina incremental y una Bulk Fill, utilizando el sistema adhesivo universal. Estudio In-vitro (Tesis de maestría). Universidad de las Américas, Quito.es_ES
dc.identifier.otherUDLA-EC-TEMRO-2019-15-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dspace.udla.edu.ec/handle/33000/11895-
dc.descriptionThe bulk fill resin is a relatively new material, with the main characteristic that restorations can be made in a single 4 mm increment, thus improving the professional's working time. Therefore; the properties of the material such as peripheral sealing, contraction, depth of curing, color and strength, they need a more thorough analysis to verify that it is a suitable material to use in patients. In the following study, the contraction volume analysis of the material was performed by comparing the conventional resin and the bulk fill resin. For which 40 third molars were divided into 4 groups: Group 1: Bulk Fill Resin Without Adhesive (RBS), Group 2: Conventional Resin Without Adhesive (RCS), Group 3: Bulk Fill Resin With Adhesive (RBC), Group 4 : Conventional Adhesive Resin (RCC), which was placed on a plaster mold; after that, class 1 cavities were made on the teeth, and, the adhesion protocol was carried out, on the RBC and RCC groups, and then restore them with Filtek TM Bulk Fill 3M ESPE resin for RBS and RBC groups, and with Filtek TM Z350 XT resin, for RCS and RCC groups. Afterward the tomography of each group was carried out in their two states before and after polymerization, once the images were obtained, they were uploaded to the AMIRA 3D Program to perform a reconstruction of these in 3D format and starting to analyze them. The obtained results were analyzed in the MINITAB statistical program, through a general linear analysis. Where it was found that conventional resins have a 2.2275 percent shrinkage and Bulk fill resins 1.8775 percent, that when a statistic analysis was obtained a P-value 0.447 being greater than our significance value P-Value 0.05 , resulting in that there is no significant difference between the resins, in addition to this it is confirmed that the universal adhesive system helps to reduce the volume of contraction.en
dc.description.abstractComparación de la contracción de polimerización entre una resina incremental y una Bulk Fill, utilizando el sistema adhesivo universal…es_ES
dc.format.extent104 p.es_ES
dc.language.isospaes_ES
dc.publisherQuito: Universidad de las Américas, 2019es_ES
dc.rightsopenAccesses_ES
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 Ecuador*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ec/*
dc.subjectODONTOLOGÍA RESTAURADORAes_ES
dc.subjectADHESIVO DENTALes_ES
dc.subjectRESINASes_ES
dc.titleComparación de la contracción de polimerización entre una resina incremental y una Bulk Fill, utilizando el sistema adhesivo universal. Estudio In-vitroes_ES
dc.typemasterThesises_ES
Aparece en las colecciones: Especialista Médico en Rehabilitación Oral

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
UDLA-EC-TEMRO-2019-15.pdf2,17 MBAdobe PDFVisualizar/Abrir


Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons