A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance using different techniques for the reattachment of fractured maxillary central incisor – an in vitro study

Saini Rashmi, S. Kumar
{"title":"A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance using different techniques for the reattachment of fractured maxillary central incisor – an in vitro study","authors":"Saini Rashmi, S. Kumar","doi":"10.4103/tdj.tdj_4_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective To comparatively evaluate fracture resistance of different techniques for the reattachment of fractured maxillary central incisors. Materials and Methods Sixty intact freshly extracted permanent maxillary central incisors were selected and randomly divided into four groups of 15 each one of control (I) and three experimental groups (II, III, IV) according to the technique of reattachment. The incisal third of the experimental groups were sectioned horizontally. Group I: the teeth were kept intact without sectioning. Group II: an internal dentinal groove (1 mm deep and 1 mm wide). Group III: a pinhole (1.5 mm depth and 1.5 mm diameter). Fractured fragments in group II and group III were reattached using composite resin. Group IV: two vertical grooves (1 mm deep, 1 mm wide, and 4 mm length) with fiber-reinforced composite post (Everstick, GC America). After 24 h of restoration, all samples in each group were then subjected to thermocycling at 5±1 and 55±1°C for 500 cycles each cycle. All the samples were mounted on the universal testing machine (instron). The force was then applied at an angle of 45° of each tooth in a labial to palatal direction at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min until fractured occurred and the obtained values were subjected to statistical analysis. Results The results showed that the mean fracture resistance of group I was the highest followed by group III, group IV, and group II the least (group II < group IV < group III < group I). Comparing the mean fracture resistance of four groups, analysis of variance showed significantly different fracture resistance among the groups (F = 22.93, P < 0.001). Conclusion No material and technique can restore the strength of intact tooth. However, reattachment techniques can be considered as an alternate method, when the fractured fragment is available with adequate size and appropriately preserved margins.","PeriodicalId":22324,"journal":{"name":"Tanta Dental Journal","volume":"20 1","pages":"110 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tanta Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/tdj.tdj_4_22","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

Objective To comparatively evaluate fracture resistance of different techniques for the reattachment of fractured maxillary central incisors. Materials and Methods Sixty intact freshly extracted permanent maxillary central incisors were selected and randomly divided into four groups of 15 each one of control (I) and three experimental groups (II, III, IV) according to the technique of reattachment. The incisal third of the experimental groups were sectioned horizontally. Group I: the teeth were kept intact without sectioning. Group II: an internal dentinal groove (1 mm deep and 1 mm wide). Group III: a pinhole (1.5 mm depth and 1.5 mm diameter). Fractured fragments in group II and group III were reattached using composite resin. Group IV: two vertical grooves (1 mm deep, 1 mm wide, and 4 mm length) with fiber-reinforced composite post (Everstick, GC America). After 24 h of restoration, all samples in each group were then subjected to thermocycling at 5±1 and 55±1°C for 500 cycles each cycle. All the samples were mounted on the universal testing machine (instron). The force was then applied at an angle of 45° of each tooth in a labial to palatal direction at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min until fractured occurred and the obtained values were subjected to statistical analysis. Results The results showed that the mean fracture resistance of group I was the highest followed by group III, group IV, and group II the least (group II < group IV < group III < group I). Comparing the mean fracture resistance of four groups, analysis of variance showed significantly different fracture resistance among the groups (F = 22.93, P < 0.001). Conclusion No material and technique can restore the strength of intact tooth. However, reattachment techniques can be considered as an alternate method, when the fractured fragment is available with adequate size and appropriately preserved margins.
不同技术对上颌中切牙骨折再植抗骨折性的比较评价-一项体外研究
目的比较评价上颌中切牙骨折后不同复位方法的抗骨折性。材料与方法选择60个新鲜拔出的完整上颌中切牙,按照再植技术随机分为4组,每组15个,对照组(I)和试验组(II、III、IV)。实验组的切部1 / 3水平切片。第一组:保持牙齿完整,不切片。第二组:牙本质内沟(1毫米深,1毫米宽)。第三组:一个针孔(1.5 mm深,1.5 mm直径)。II组和III组骨折块采用复合树脂重新连接。第四组:两个垂直凹槽(深1mm,宽1mm,长4mm),纤维增强复合桩(evertick, GC America)。修复24 h后,各组所有样品在5±1℃和55±1℃下进行热循环,每循环500次。所有样品均安装在万能试验机(instron)上。然后以1 mm/min的十字速度,在唇部至腭部方向以每颗牙齿45°夹角施加力,直至发生骨折,并对所得值进行统计分析。结果I组平均骨折阻力最高,其次为III组、IV组、II组最小(II组< IV组< III组< I组),四组平均骨折阻力比较方差分析显示各组间骨折阻力差异有统计学意义(F = 22.93, P < 0.001)。结论没有任何材料和技术可以恢复完整牙的强度。然而,当骨折碎片有足够的尺寸和适当的边缘保存时,再附着技术可以被认为是一种替代方法。
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
×
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