ANÁLISE DO PADRÃO DE FRATURAS EM PINOS ANATOMIZADOS CIMENTADOS COM DIFERENTES AGENTES CIMENTANTES

Raísa Cristina Madeira Barbosa, N. Souza, A. Pereira, V. Rodrigues, I. Santana
{"title":"ANÁLISE DO PADRÃO DE FRATURAS EM PINOS ANATOMIZADOS CIMENTADOS COM DIFERENTES AGENTES CIMENTANTES","authors":"Raísa Cristina Madeira Barbosa, N. Souza, A. Pereira, V. Rodrigues, I. Santana","doi":"10.17765/1518-1243.2017V19N2P145-151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The breaking pattern in teeth with glass fiber pins (GFP), anatomized and fixed with different cementing agents, is analyzed in vitro. Thirty bovine mandibular uni-radicular teeth were used. Roots were treated endodontically and randomly divided into two groups according to the cementing agent employed, or rather, G1: auto-adhesive resinous cement (RelyX U200-3M ESPE), and G2: conventional resinous cement (Allcem-FGM). After the anatomization and cementation of pins, the specimens were stored in a buffer at 37oC for 7 days. Roots were then cut under flowing water and six 1mm-thick slices were cut, totaling 180 specimens. The push-out test was performed for all specimens and then placed under a light microscope to assess the type of fracture. The most frequent type of fracture for the two groups comprised coesine in dentin (G1 = 32.2%; G2 = 30%). There was a statistically greater frequency in adhesive failures between dentin and cement in G2 (p=0.007), with a statistically higher frequency (p=0.027) of cohesive fracture in dentin in the third cervical (38.3%) when compared to the third apical (20.0%). Results suggest that auto-adhesive cement (RelyX U200-3M ESPE) had more positive results in the analysis of fracture patterns.","PeriodicalId":30388,"journal":{"name":"Iniciacao Cientifica Cesumar","volume":"19 1","pages":"145-151"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iniciacao Cientifica Cesumar","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17765/1518-1243.2017V19N2P145-151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The breaking pattern in teeth with glass fiber pins (GFP), anatomized and fixed with different cementing agents, is analyzed in vitro. Thirty bovine mandibular uni-radicular teeth were used. Roots were treated endodontically and randomly divided into two groups according to the cementing agent employed, or rather, G1: auto-adhesive resinous cement (RelyX U200-3M ESPE), and G2: conventional resinous cement (Allcem-FGM). After the anatomization and cementation of pins, the specimens were stored in a buffer at 37oC for 7 days. Roots were then cut under flowing water and six 1mm-thick slices were cut, totaling 180 specimens. The push-out test was performed for all specimens and then placed under a light microscope to assess the type of fracture. The most frequent type of fracture for the two groups comprised coesine in dentin (G1 = 32.2%; G2 = 30%). There was a statistically greater frequency in adhesive failures between dentin and cement in G2 (p=0.007), with a statistically higher frequency (p=0.027) of cohesive fracture in dentin in the third cervical (38.3%) when compared to the third apical (20.0%). Results suggest that auto-adhesive cement (RelyX U200-3M ESPE) had more positive results in the analysis of fracture patterns.
不同胶凝剂胶结解剖桩的骨折模式分析
对玻璃纤维销(GFP)牙体解剖和不同固接剂固定后的断裂模式进行了体外分析。选用30颗牛下颌骨单根牙。对牙根进行根管治疗,根据使用的胶结剂随机分为两组,G1:自粘树脂水泥(RelyX U200-3M ESPE), G2:常规树脂水泥(allem - fgm)。解剖钉固接后,标本在37℃的缓冲液中保存7天。然后在流水下切开根,切下6片1mm厚的薄片,共180个标本。对所有标本进行推出试验,然后置于光镜下评估骨折类型。两组最常见的骨折类型为牙本质内骨折(G1 = 32.2%;G2 = 30%)。G2组牙本质与骨水泥粘连失败的发生率有统计学意义(p=0.007),其中第三颈椎牙本质粘连骨折发生率(38.3%)高于第三根尖牙本质粘连骨折发生率(20.0%)(p=0.027)。结果表明,自动粘接水泥(RelyX U200-3M ESPE)在分析骨折模式方面具有更积极的效果。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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