List of Articles by Author

1. Çaglar E, Sandalli N, Kuscu OO, Kargul B. The buffering capacity of probiotic yogurt. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2011;45(1):41-5.
    [details]
    [close]
   Full Text

   Title in English:	The buffering capacity of probiotic yogurt
   Title in Croatian:	Puferski kapacitet probiotičkih jogurta
   Type of Article:	original scientific paper
   MeSH:	(no MeSH data)
   Abstract:	Aim: The potential buffering role of probiotic yogurt has not been investigated. The aim of the study was to determine the pH, titratable acidity of a selection of various probiotic yogurts, their buffering effects with an emphasis on the pH range in which the buffer is efficient. Material & Methods: A quantity of 25 ml of each yogurt was titrated with 1 mol/L sodium hydroxide, added gradually by 0.5 ml, until the pH reached 10 to assess the total titratable acidity - a measure of probiotic yogurt’s own buffering capacity. Results: The initial pH was the lowest for Activia peach yogurt (4.40± 0.14) and the highest for Danone natural yogurt (5.29± 0.10). The buffering capacities can be listed as follows: Danone natural >Danone peach >Activia plain >Activia strawberry >Activia peach. There were no statistically significant differences observed between yogurts within any of the five groups compared as a whole with one another. (p >0.05). Conclusions: Buffering capacities of probiotic yogurts should be undermined.

2. Çaglar E, Kuvvetli S, Çıldır Ş, Kuscu OO, Alp F, Sandalli N. Micro-tensile dentin bond strength of two all-in-one adhesives and an etch-and-rinse adhesive. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2010;44(2):90-5.
    [details]
    [close]
   Full Text

   Title in English:	Micro-tensile dentin bond strength of two all-in-one adhesives and an etch-and-rinse adhesive
   Title in Croatian:	Mikrozatezna čvrstoća veze dvaju adhezivnih sustava “sve u jednome” te jednoga s jetkanjem i ispiranjem
   Type of Article:	original scientific paper
   MeSH:	ADHESION + etiology DENTIN-BONDING AGENTS + analysis TENSILE STRENGTH + drug effects
   Abstract:	Aim: The purpose of the present study is to evaluate the micro-tensile bond strength to dentin of two all-in-one adhesives and an etch-and-rinse adhesive. Material and Methods: The teeth were randomly divided into three groups for treatment with one of the following adhesives: Adhese One®, Futurabond M® and Adper Singlebond® (control). Roots and the apical floor of pulp chambers were removed with a microtome. The build-ups were vertically sectioned into rectangular (≈1mmx 1mm) compound bars with microtome. The bars were submitted to tensile tests at constant crosshead speed (1mm/min) using a universal testing machine and tested for each adhesive. Fifteen specimens were manufactured and tested for each material for permanent dentin. Fractured surfaces were inspected to determine the mode of fracture. Results: The bond strengths of Adhese One (5,83±3,13 MPa) was significantly lower than Futurabond M (15,76±4,2 MPa) (p:0,0001) and Adper Singlebond (21,14±5,04 MPa) (p:0,0001) while dentin bond strenght of Futurabond M was significantly lower than that of Adper Singlebond (p:0,003). Conclusions: The tested all-in-one adhesives showed lower dentin bond strengths than an etch-and-rinse adhesive.