Michael Taschner
University of Erlangen-Nuremberg
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Michael Taschner.
Journal of Dental Research | 2006
N. Krämer; Karl-Heinz Kunzelmann; Michael Taschner; Albert Mehl; Franklin Garcia-Godoy; Roland Frankenberger
Wear phenomena of ceramic inlays are not fully understood. The aim of the present study was to evaluate ceramic wear, antagonist enamel wear, and luting cement wear over 8 years. The two-fold null hypothesis was that there would be (1) no difference in wear behavior between ceramic and enamel, and (2) no influence of filler content of luting composites on composite wear. From 96 restorations, 36 Class II inlays from 16 participants were selected. For inlays with opposing enamel cusps (n = 17), replicas of inlays and enamel were scanned with a 3-D laser scanner. Luting gaps of inlays (n = 36) were analyzed with a profilometer, including 3-D data analysis. Ceramic and enamel wear increased between 4 and 8 years, with significantly higher values for enamel after 6 years (p < 0.05). Luting gap wear increased continuously up to 8 years (p < 0.05), with no influence of luting composites (p > 0.05) and location of teeth (p > 0.05).
European Journal of Oral Sciences | 2010
Michael Taschner; Fernando Nato; Annalisa Mazzoni; Roland Frankenberger; Norbert Krämer; Roberto Di Lenarda; Anselm Petschelt; Lorenzo Breschi
The aim of this study was to analyse the effect of preliminary phosphoric acid etching of enamel and dentine before the application of two, one-step self-etch adhesive systems. The systems were applied onto acid-etched or smear-layer-covered enamel and dentine. The treatment groups were as follows: group 1, Adper Easy Bond (3M ESPE) on etched substrate; group 2, Adper Easy Bond (control); group 3, iBond Self-Etch (Heraeus Kulzer) on etched substrate; and group 4, iBond Self-Etch (control). Enamel and dentine bond strengths were calculated using microshear and microtensile bond-strength tests. Additional specimens were prepared to evaluate nanoleakage at the dentine-adhesive interface and were investigated using light microscopy or transmission electron microscopy. Both adhesives demonstrated higher microshear bond strengths when enamel was pre-acid-etched with phosphoric acid (Adper Easy Bond 28.7 ± 4.8 MPa; iBond Self-Etch 19.7 ± 3.6 MPa) compared with controls (Adper Easy Bond 19.2 ± 3.3 MPa; iBond Self-Etch 17.5 ± 2.7 MPa) and increased microtensile bond strength when applied on acid-etched (Adper Easy Bond 35.8 ± 5.7 MPa; iBond Self-Etch 24.3 ± 7.9 MPa) vs. smear-layer-covered dentine (Adper Easy Bond 26.9 ± 6.2 MPa; iBond Self-Etch 17.6 ± 4.3 MPa). Adper Easy Bond showed lower nanoleakage than iBond Self-Etch, irrespective of preliminary etching. The results of this study support the use of phosphoric acid etching before the application of one-step self-etch adhesive systems.
Dental Materials | 2012
Michael Taschner; Norbert Krämer; Ulrich Lohbauer; Matthias Pelka; Lorenzo Breschi; Anselm Petschelt; Roland Frankenberger
OBJECTIVES Aim of the present prospective controlled clinical study was to compare the clinical performances of two different cementation procedures to lute IPS Empress inlays and onlays. METHODS Eighty-three IPS Empress restorations (70 class-II inlays, 13 onlays/47 premolars, 36 molars) were placed in 30 patients (19 females/11 males, mean age=39 years). Two cementation procedures were tested: group 1: forty-three restorations were luted with a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX Unicem, RX, 3M ESPE); group 2: forty restorations were luted with an etch-and-rinse multistep adhesive (Syntac Classic, Ivoclar-Vivadent) and Variolink II low (SV, Ivoclar-Vivadent). All restorations were evaluated after 2 weeks (baseline=1st recall=R1, n=83), 6 months (R2, n=83), 1 year (R3, n=82), and 2 years (R4, n=82) by two independent blinded calibrated examiners using modified USPHS criteria. RESULTS From R1 to R4, one failure occurred in the SV group (at R2) due to marginal enamel chipping. After 2 years of clinical service (R4), better marginal and tooth integrity (p<0.05) was found in group 2 (SV) compared to the use of the self-adhesive cement (RX, group 1), while no differences were found for all remaining investigated criteria (p>0.05). The absence of enamel in proximal boxes (10% with no enamel and 51% of the restorations with less than 0.5mm enamel width at the bottom of the proximal box) did not affect marginal performance (p>0.05). SIGNIFICANCE The self-adhesive resin cement RelyX Unicem showed clinical outcomes similar to a conventional multi-step cementation procedure after 2 years of clinical service for most of the tested criteria.
Journal of Adhesive Dentistry | 2008
Roland Frankenberger; Ulrich Lohbauer; Matthias J. Roggendorf; Michael Naumann; Michael Taschner
Journal of Adhesive Dentistry | 2008
Roland Frankenberger; Michael Taschner; Franklin Garcia-Godoy; Anselm Petschelt; Norbert Krämer
Dental Materials | 2015
J. Zorzin; Eva Maier; Sarah Harre; Tobias Fey; Renan Belli; Ulrich Lohbauer; Anselm Petschelt; Michael Taschner
Journal of Adhesive Dentistry | 2008
Norbert Krämer; Michael Taschner; Ulrich Lohbauer; Anselm Petschelt; Roland Frankenberger
Journal of Adhesive Dentistry | 2007
Roland Frankenberger; Ulrich Lohbauer; Franklin R. Tay; Michael Taschner; Sergej A. Nikolaenko
Journal of Adhesive Dentistry | 2007
Roland Frankenberger; Ulrich Lohbauer; Michael Taschner; Anselm Petschelt; Sergej A. Nikolaenko
European Journal of Oral Sciences | 2012
Michael Taschner; Fernando Nato; Annalisa Mazzoni; Roland Frankenberger; Mirella Falconi; Anselm Petschelt; Lorenzo Breschi