自适应PFS与弹性FRC桩芯体系抗断裂性能的比较评价——体外研究

R. A, M. K, R. T, G. Sajjan, R. Kv, Ambika S
{"title":"自适应PFS与弹性FRC桩芯体系抗断裂性能的比较评价——体外研究","authors":"R. A, M. K, R. T, G. Sajjan, R. Kv, Ambika S","doi":"10.37983/ijdm.2019.1101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with extensive coronal destruction are more prone to fracture, so restoring these teeth with techniques that will not compromise the integrity of remaining tooth structure with the use of Post and core systems to retain full and final crown restorations seems mandatory. Anatomic posts have been introduced which have better adaptability to the canal anatomy and conserve more amount of tooth structure. Aim: This study was done to compare the fracture resistance of ETT restored with two anatomic post systems elastic FRC post (everStick) and self-adapting PFS (Spirapost). Materials and Methods: Twenty single rooted maxillary central incisors were selected for the study. All the samples were endodontically treated and randomly divided into 2 groups (n=10) according to the post system used (PFS post – Group I, FRC– Group II). In all the samples, post space preparation was done and the posts were luted using dual cure resin cement (Para core, Coltene, Mumbai, India). The remaining core was built using composite resin (Filtek, 3M, ESPE, USA). The samples were stored in saline for one week. All the samples were thermocycled for 500 cycles from 5 to 550C ±50C with a dwelling time of 30 seconds in each bath and a transfer time of five seconds. Fracture resistance of the samples was measured using universal testing machine. The obtained data was statistically analyzed by using independent t test. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between fracture resistance values of FRC and PFS groups. 30% and 70% of the samples of PFS and FRC showed favourable fractures respectively. Conclusion: The fracture resistance of PFS was comparable to that of FRC post. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Correspondence: *Corresponding author Email Address: revathiandhavarapu@gmail.com How to cite this article: Revathi A, Madhu Varma K, Rambabu T, Sajjan GS, Raman KV, Ambika S. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of self-adapting PFS and elastic FRC post and core systems – An in vitro study. Int J Dent Mater. 1(1): 02-06. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.37983/IJDM.2019.1101 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________","PeriodicalId":132317,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Dental Materials","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of self-adapting PFS and elastic FRC post and core systems –An in vitrostudy\",\"authors\":\"R. A, M. K, R. T, G. Sajjan, R. Kv, Ambika S\",\"doi\":\"10.37983/ijdm.2019.1101\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with extensive coronal destruction are more prone to fracture, so restoring these teeth with techniques that will not compromise the integrity of remaining tooth structure with the use of Post and core systems to retain full and final crown restorations seems mandatory. Anatomic posts have been introduced which have better adaptability to the canal anatomy and conserve more amount of tooth structure. Aim: This study was done to compare the fracture resistance of ETT restored with two anatomic post systems elastic FRC post (everStick) and self-adapting PFS (Spirapost). Materials and Methods: Twenty single rooted maxillary central incisors were selected for the study. All the samples were endodontically treated and randomly divided into 2 groups (n=10) according to the post system used (PFS post – Group I, FRC– Group II). In all the samples, post space preparation was done and the posts were luted using dual cure resin cement (Para core, Coltene, Mumbai, India). The remaining core was built using composite resin (Filtek, 3M, ESPE, USA). The samples were stored in saline for one week. All the samples were thermocycled for 500 cycles from 5 to 550C ±50C with a dwelling time of 30 seconds in each bath and a transfer time of five seconds. Fracture resistance of the samples was measured using universal testing machine. The obtained data was statistically analyzed by using independent t test. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between fracture resistance values of FRC and PFS groups. 30% and 70% of the samples of PFS and FRC showed favourable fractures respectively. Conclusion: The fracture resistance of PFS was comparable to that of FRC post. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Correspondence: *Corresponding author Email Address: revathiandhavarapu@gmail.com How to cite this article: Revathi A, Madhu Varma K, Rambabu T, Sajjan GS, Raman KV, Ambika S. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of self-adapting PFS and elastic FRC post and core systems – An in vitro study. Int J Dent Mater. 1(1): 02-06. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.37983/IJDM.2019.1101 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________\",\"PeriodicalId\":132317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Dental Materials\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Dental Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37983/ijdm.2019.1101\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Dental Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37983/ijdm.2019.1101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:牙髓治疗的牙齿(ETT)具有广泛的冠状破坏更容易发生骨折,因此修复这些牙齿的技术不会损害剩余牙齿结构的完整性,使用桩核系统来保留完整和最终的冠修复似乎是必要的。解剖桩可以更好地适应根管解剖结构,保留更多的牙体结构。目的:本研究比较弹性FRC桩(everStick)和自适应PFS桩(Spirapost)两种解剖桩系统修复ETT的抗骨折性。材料与方法:选择20个单根上颌中切牙进行研究。所有样本均进行根管治疗,根据所使用的桩制(PFS桩- I组,FRC桩- II组)随机分为2组(n=10)。所有样本均进行桩位准备,桩用双固化树脂水泥(Para core, Coltene, Mumbai, India)修补。其余岩心采用复合树脂(Filtek, 3M, ESPE, USA)。样品在生理盐水中保存一周。所有样品在5 - 550C±50C范围内热循环500次,每个浴槽停留时间为30秒,转移时间为5秒。采用万能试验机对试样的抗断裂性能进行了测试。所得资料采用独立t检验进行统计学分析。结果:FRC组与PFS组的骨折阻力值差异无统计学意义。PFS和FRC分别有30%和70%的样品显示有利骨折。结论:PFS与FRC桩的抗骨折性相当。_____________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 函授:*通讯作者的电子邮件地址:revathiandhavarapu@gmail.com如何引用这篇文章:Revathi, Madhu Varma K, Rambabu T, Sajjan GS、拉曼KV, Ambika美国比较评价断裂阻力的自适应PFS和弹性FRC post和核心系统——一个体外研究。国际医学杂志,1(1):02-06。DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.37983/IJDM.2019.1101 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of self-adapting PFS and elastic FRC post and core systems –An in vitrostudy
Background: Endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with extensive coronal destruction are more prone to fracture, so restoring these teeth with techniques that will not compromise the integrity of remaining tooth structure with the use of Post and core systems to retain full and final crown restorations seems mandatory. Anatomic posts have been introduced which have better adaptability to the canal anatomy and conserve more amount of tooth structure. Aim: This study was done to compare the fracture resistance of ETT restored with two anatomic post systems elastic FRC post (everStick) and self-adapting PFS (Spirapost). Materials and Methods: Twenty single rooted maxillary central incisors were selected for the study. All the samples were endodontically treated and randomly divided into 2 groups (n=10) according to the post system used (PFS post – Group I, FRC– Group II). In all the samples, post space preparation was done and the posts were luted using dual cure resin cement (Para core, Coltene, Mumbai, India). The remaining core was built using composite resin (Filtek, 3M, ESPE, USA). The samples were stored in saline for one week. All the samples were thermocycled for 500 cycles from 5 to 550C ±50C with a dwelling time of 30 seconds in each bath and a transfer time of five seconds. Fracture resistance of the samples was measured using universal testing machine. The obtained data was statistically analyzed by using independent t test. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between fracture resistance values of FRC and PFS groups. 30% and 70% of the samples of PFS and FRC showed favourable fractures respectively. Conclusion: The fracture resistance of PFS was comparable to that of FRC post. _____________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Correspondence: *Corresponding author Email Address: revathiandhavarapu@gmail.com How to cite this article: Revathi A, Madhu Varma K, Rambabu T, Sajjan GS, Raman KV, Ambika S. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of self-adapting PFS and elastic FRC post and core systems – An in vitro study. Int J Dent Mater. 1(1): 02-06. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.37983/IJDM.2019.1101 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信