Skip to content
akaturk Academic measurement

Article detail · 2021 · article

Evaluation of the radiopacity of restorative materials with different structures and thicknesses using a digital radiography system

ISSN2233-7822
YÖKSİS OpenAlex Open access · gold Top 10%
Year2021
Citations39OpenAlex
Citations36Semantic Scholar · 2 influential
Percentile%92.4
FWCI3.181.00 = world average
Scopus (SJR)Q2

Data source split

  • YÖKSİSYÖKSİS article record
  • YÖKSİS venueImaging Science in Dentistry
  • Catalog match (ISSN)Imaging Science in Dentistry
  • OpenAlexOpenAlex enrichment (abstract, citations, topics)
  • Semantic Scholarcitation count (not merged with OpenAlex)

Abstract

OpenAlex English

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiopacities of various types of restorative materials with different thicknesses compared with enamel, dentin, and aluminum.Materials and Methods: Four bulk-fill resins, 2 hybrid ceramics, 2 micro-hybrid resin composites, 6 glass ionomerbased materials, 2 zinc phosphate cements, and an amalgam were used in the study.Twelve disk-shaped specimens were prepared from each of 17 restorative materials with thicknesses of 1 mm, 2 mm, and 4 mm (n = 4).All the restorative material specimens with the same thickness, an aluminum (Al) step wedge, and enamel and dentin specimens were positioned on a phosphor storage plate and exposed using a dental X-ray unit.The mean gray values were measured on digital images and converted to equivalent Al thicknesses.Statistical analyses were performed using 2-way analysis of variance and the Bonferroni post hoc test (P<0.05).Results: Radiopacity was significantly affected by both the thickness and the material type (P<0.05).GCP Glass Fill had the lowest radiopacity value for samples of 1 mm thickness, while Vita Enamic had the lowest radiopacity value for 2-mm-thick and 4-mm-thick samples.The materials with the highest radiopacity values after the amalgam were zinc phosphate cements.Conclusion: Significant differences were observed in the radiopacities of restorative materials with different thicknesses.Radiopacity was affected by both the material type and thickness.(

Topics

Citations

OpenAlex cited_by_count. Not a WoS or Scopus citation count; those sources have no separate column here.

39citationsOpenAlex · cited_by_count (cache / database)

14 publications in the local catalog that cite this work (OpenAlex reference match; not the full global list).

  1. 2023 Radiopacity evaluation of different types of resin restorative materials using a digital radiography systemCitations 12 · OpenAlex
  2. 2023 The radiographic evaluation of 11 different resin compositesCitations 9 · OpenAlex
  3. 2025 Evaluation of the radiopacity of single-shade composite restorative materials using a digital radiography systemCitations 4 · OpenAlex
  4. 2025 Evaluation of the radiopacity of single-shade composite restorative materials using a digital radiography systemCitations 3 · OpenAlex
  5. 2025 Radiopacity of Universal Flowable Composite Resins: A Comparative EvaluationCitations 3 · OpenAlex
  6. 2024 Radiopacity evaluations of the novel calcium-silicate and glass-ionomer-based materialsCitations 1 · OpenAlex
  7. 2024 Radiopacity evaluations of the novel calcium-silicate andglass-ionomer-based materialsCitations 1 · OpenAlex
  8. 2026 Radiopacity of contemporary flowable resin composites with different material formulationsCitations 0 · OpenAlex
  9. 2026 Deep Learning-Based Classification of Zirconia and Metal-Supported Porcelain Fixed Restorations on Panoramic RadiographsCitations 0 · OpenAlex
  10. 2026 Evaluation of radiopacity in preheated fissure sealants: an in-vitro studyCitations 0 · OpenAlex

Authors

3
  1. Ayla Yaylacı 1
  2. EMİNE ŞİRİN KARAARSLAN TOKAT GAZİOSMANPAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ 2
  3. HÜSEYİN HATIRLI 3