Fracture Resistance and Push-Out Bond Strength of Three Post Types in the Restoration of Anterior Primary Teeth - A In Vitro study.

Q3 Dentistry
Asmaa E Eltobgy, Magda Elmalt, Alaa Eldehna
{"title":"Fracture Resistance and Push-Out Bond Strength of Three Post Types in the Restoration of Anterior Primary Teeth - A In Vitro study.","authors":"Asmaa E Eltobgy, Magda Elmalt, Alaa Eldehna","doi":"10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_202_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Restoration fractures and displacement are the two main causes of failure after the rehabilitation of severely worn primary anterior teeth.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>Compare the effect of three post types on the fracture and push-out bond strength.</p><p><strong>Methods and materials: </strong>Sixty undamaged maxillary anterior primary teeth were allocated into three groups according to post type: (I) Tetric N Ceram composite post, (II) prefabricated glass fiber post, and (III) high viscous glass ionomer post. Each group was further subdivided into two sub-groups depending on the test used: fracture resistance test and push-out bond strength test. The all specimens were mounted in acrylic resin blocks and tested using a universal testing machine. The fracture and failure mode were determined by a stereomicroscope inspection of all the specimens. Data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Bonferroni post hoc test (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was a statistically significant difference between fracture resistance and push-out bond strength values for the experimental groups (P < 0.05). The most significant fracture resistance value was in Group II and core/post fracture (restorable fracture) was the most obvious fracture in the three groups with the highest percentage in Group I. The most significant push-out bond strength value was in Group I and adhesive failure between dentin and luting cement/post was the most common type in the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The fracture resistance and push-out bond strength were affected by the type of post (P = 0.000). Prefabricated glass fiber posts showed the highest fracture resistance in this study. However, Tetric N Ceram composite posts had the most restorable fracture. Tetric N Ceram composite posts had the highest bond strength with adhesive failure mode.</p>","PeriodicalId":13311,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Dental Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Dental Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_202_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: Restoration fractures and displacement are the two main causes of failure after the rehabilitation of severely worn primary anterior teeth.

Aims: Compare the effect of three post types on the fracture and push-out bond strength.

Methods and materials: Sixty undamaged maxillary anterior primary teeth were allocated into three groups according to post type: (I) Tetric N Ceram composite post, (II) prefabricated glass fiber post, and (III) high viscous glass ionomer post. Each group was further subdivided into two sub-groups depending on the test used: fracture resistance test and push-out bond strength test. The all specimens were mounted in acrylic resin blocks and tested using a universal testing machine. The fracture and failure mode were determined by a stereomicroscope inspection of all the specimens. Data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Bonferroni post hoc test (P < 0.05).

Results: There was a statistically significant difference between fracture resistance and push-out bond strength values for the experimental groups (P < 0.05). The most significant fracture resistance value was in Group II and core/post fracture (restorable fracture) was the most obvious fracture in the three groups with the highest percentage in Group I. The most significant push-out bond strength value was in Group I and adhesive failure between dentin and luting cement/post was the most common type in the groups.

Conclusions: The fracture resistance and push-out bond strength were affected by the type of post (P = 0.000). Prefabricated glass fiber posts showed the highest fracture resistance in this study. However, Tetric N Ceram composite posts had the most restorable fracture. Tetric N Ceram composite posts had the highest bond strength with adhesive failure mode.

修复前基牙时三种牙柱的抗折性和推挤粘接强度 - 一项体外研究。
背景:修复体折断和移位是严重磨损的前牙修复失败的两个主要原因。目的:比较三种基桩类型对折断和推出粘接强度的影响:将 60 颗未损坏的上颌前基牙按基桩类型分为三组:(I) Tetric N Ceram 复合基桩;(II) 预制玻璃纤维基桩;(III) 高粘度玻璃离聚体基桩。每组又根据所使用的测试细分为两个子组:抗断裂测试和推出粘接强度测试。所有试样均安装在丙烯酸树脂块中,并使用万能试验机进行测试。所有试样的断裂和破坏模式都是通过体视显微镜检查确定的。数据分析采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)和 Bonferroni 后检验(P < 0.05):结果:实验组的抗断裂强度和推出粘接强度值之间存在显著的统计学差异(P < 0.05)。骨折阻力值最明显的是第二组,牙本质和胶结骨/柱之间的粘接失败是三组中最常见的类型:结论:抗折性和推出粘接强度受牙科柱类型的影响(P = 0.000)。在这项研究中,预制玻璃纤维桩的抗折性最高。然而,Tetric N Ceram 复合材料支柱的断裂恢复能力最强。Tetric N Ceram 复合材料支柱的粘合强度最高,但存在粘合失效模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Indian Journal of Dental Research
Indian Journal of Dental Research Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
80
审稿时长
38 weeks
期刊介绍: Indian Journal of Dental Research (IJDR) is the official publication of the Indian Society for Dental Research (ISDR), India section of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR), published quarterly. IJDR publishes scientific papers on well designed and controlled original research involving orodental sciences. Papers may also include reports on unusual and interesting case presentations and invited review papers on significant topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信