Reema Alshargi
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Reema Alshargi has a total of 7 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Alanoud Alhaidari
College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 12372, Saudi Arabia
1 shared publication - Ayman M. Sulimany
Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia
1 shared publication - Fatimah Alfawzan
College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 12372, Saudi Arabia
1 shared publication - Mannaa K. Aldowsari
Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11545, Saudi Arabia
1 shared publication - Mohammed Alturki
Department of Restorative Dental Science, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 12372, Saudi Arabia
1 shared publication - Nada Alhogail
College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 12372, Saudi Arabia
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Three Types of Adhesive Materials Used in the Restoration of Permanent Molars after Treatment with Silver Diamine Fluoride: An In Vitro Study
Background: Permanent blackish discoloration of the tooth structure post application of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) is one of its drawbacks. Several restorative materials have been used to restore and mask the blackish discoloration of SDF-treated teeth. Recently, a new self-adhesive material has been introduced and is marketed as an all-in-one etchant, adhesive, and restorative material indicated for use in all clinical situations. This study aimed to assess the shear bond strength of the new self-adhesive restorative material and compare it with adhesive restorative materials- resin-based composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement to dentin of extracted permanent teeth treated with 38% SDF. Methods: Thirty-nine caries-free extracted teeth (n = 39) were grouped into three groups. Following 38% SDF application, the specimens were loaded with resin-based (Group I), the new self-adhesive restorative material (SDR) Surefil (Group II), and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (Group III). Shear bond strength (SBS) was calculated, and failure modes were evaluated using the universal testing device (3) Results: The composite showed the highest bond strength, followed by Group II while Group III had the lowest bond strength of all tested materials. Regarding failure type, the composite showed 100% adhesive failure, while Group III and Group II showed mostly adhesive failure with some combination. (4) Conclusions: RBC had a significantly stronger SBS to demineralized dentin surfaces of permanent molar teeth treated with SDF when compared to SDR Surefil and RMGIC.
Open AccessComparison of Shear Bond Strength of Three Types of Adhesive Materials Used in the Restoration of Permanent Molars after Treatment with Silver Diamine Fluoride: An In Vitro Study
Background: Permanent blackish discoloration of the tooth structure post application of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) is one of its drawbacks. Several restorative materials have been used to restore and mask the blackish discoloration of SDF-treated teeth. Recently, a new self-adhesive material has been introduced and is marketed as an all-in-one etchant, adhesive, and restorative material indicated for use in all clinical situations. This study aimed to assess the shear bond strength of the new self-adhesive restorative material and compare it with adhesive restorative materials- resin-based composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement to dentin of extracted permanent teeth treated with 38% SDF. Methods: Thirty-nine caries-free extracted teeth (n = 39) were grouped into three groups. Following 38% SDF application, the specimens were loaded with resin-based (Group I), the new self-adhesive restorative material (SDR) Surefil (Group II), and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (Group III). Shear bond strength (SBS) was calculated, and failure modes were evaluated using the universal testing device (3) Results: The composite showed the highest bond strength, followed by Group II while Group III had the lowest bond strength of all tested materials. Regarding failure type, the composite showed 100% adhesive failure, while Group III and Group II showed mostly adhesive failure with some combination. (4) Conclusions: RBC had a significantly stronger SBS to demineralized dentin surfaces of permanent molar teeth treated with SDF when compared to SDR Surefil and RMGIC.