Figure 1: SEM photomicrograph of resin- dentin interface of Group 1 (No Pretreatment): Immediate (1A), Delayed (1B); interfacial gap is evident at nine months.
|
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Std. Error |
P VALUES |
POST HOC ANALYSIS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pa |
Pb |
IMMEDIATE |
CONTROL |
10 |
29.014b |
2.537 |
0.802 |
0.001*, SIG |
BAICALEIN> CURCUMIN> CONTROL> BERBERINE |
|
BAICALEIN |
10 |
45.493 a |
4.426 |
1.4 |
||
|
CURCUMIN |
10 |
28.443b |
3.321 |
1.05 |
||
|
BERBERINE |
10 |
12.904c |
2.742 |
0.867 |
||
DELAYED |
CONTROL |
10 |
18.315c |
3.928 |
1.242 |
0.001*, SIG |
BAICALEIN> CURCUMIN> CONTROL> BERBERINE |
|
BAICALEIN |
10 |
43.63a |
1.83 |
0.579 |
||
|
CURCUMIN |
10 |
26.21b |
2.915 |
0.922 |
||
|
BERBERINE |
10 |
12.561d |
1.69 |
0.534 |
ONE WAY ANOVA
PAIR WISE: POST HOC TUKEY’S TEST
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANE SET AT P < 0.05
Same superscript letters: non-significant
Different superscript letters: significant
Table 1 : Comparison of bond strength among four groups for immediate and delayed samples
Figure 1: SEM photomicrograph of resin- dentin interface of Group 1 (No Pretreatment): Immediate (1A), Delayed (1B); interfacial gap is evident at nine months.
Figure 2: SEM photomicrograph of resin- dentin interface of Group 2 (Baicalein): Immediate (2A), Delayed (2B); good interfacial adaptation can be observed at both time periods.
Figure 3: SEM photomicrograph of resin- dentin interface of Group 3 (Curcumin): Immediate (3A), Delayed (3B); good interfacial seal is evident.
Figure 4: SEM photomicrograph of resin- dentin interface of Group 4 (Berberine): Immediate (4A), Delayed (4B); interfacial gap is observed at nine months.
Figure 5: Failure mode analysis
Tables at a glance
Figures at a glance