{"title":"重新连接还是修复？不同中间材料对简单冠状骨折的抗断裂性能研究。","authors":"Soner Sismanoglu, Vasfiye Isik","doi":"10.1111/aej.70001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of different bonding materials used in fragment reattachment for uncomplicated crown fractures, compared to direct composite resin restoration. Sixty human maxillary incisors were divided into five groups (n = 12): G1, control; G2, direct composite resin; G3, flowable composite; G4, preheated composite; G5, self-adhesive resin cement. After simulated fractures and thermocycling, fracture resistance was tested using a universal machine. Data were analysed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). G1 showed the highest resistance (75.7 ± 10.5 MPa); G2 the lowest (44.7 ± 7.9 MPa). G4 and G5 showed significantly higher resistance than G2 (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found amongst G3-G5 (p > 0.05). Preheated composite and self-adhesive resin cement demonstrated improved fracture resistance compared to direct composite resin. Appropriate material selection may enhance the long-term performance of fragment reattachment in uncomplicated crown fractures.</p>","PeriodicalId":55581,"journal":{"name":"Australian Endodontic Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reattachment or Restoration? Fracture Resistance of Uncomplicated Crown Fractures Using Various Intermediate Materials.\",\"authors\":\"Soner Sismanoglu, Vasfiye Isik\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aej.70001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of different bonding materials used in fragment reattachment for uncomplicated crown fractures, compared to direct composite resin restoration. Sixty human maxillary incisors were divided into five groups (n = 12): G1, control; G2, direct composite resin; G3, flowable composite; G4, preheated composite; G5, self-adhesive resin cement. After simulated fractures and thermocycling, fracture resistance was tested using a universal machine. Data were analysed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). G1 showed the highest resistance (75.7 ± 10.5 MPa); G2 the lowest (44.7 ± 7.9 MPa). G4 and G5 showed significantly higher resistance than G2 (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found amongst G3-G5 (p > 0.05). Preheated composite and self-adhesive resin cement demonstrated improved fracture resistance compared to direct composite resin. Appropriate material selection may enhance the long-term performance of fragment reattachment in uncomplicated crown fractures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55581,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Endodontic Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Endodontic Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.70001\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Endodontic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.70001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reattachment or Restoration? Fracture Resistance of Uncomplicated Crown Fractures Using Various Intermediate Materials.
This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of different bonding materials used in fragment reattachment for uncomplicated crown fractures, compared to direct composite resin restoration. Sixty human maxillary incisors were divided into five groups (n = 12): G1, control; G2, direct composite resin; G3, flowable composite; G4, preheated composite; G5, self-adhesive resin cement. After simulated fractures and thermocycling, fracture resistance was tested using a universal machine. Data were analysed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). G1 showed the highest resistance (75.7 ± 10.5 MPa); G2 the lowest (44.7 ± 7.9 MPa). G4 and G5 showed significantly higher resistance than G2 (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found amongst G3-G5 (p > 0.05). Preheated composite and self-adhesive resin cement demonstrated improved fracture resistance compared to direct composite resin. Appropriate material selection may enhance the long-term performance of fragment reattachment in uncomplicated crown fractures.
期刊介绍：
The Australian Endodontic Journal provides a forum for communication in the different fields that encompass endodontics for all specialists and dentists with an interest in the morphology, physiology, and pathology of the human tooth, in particular the dental pulp, root and peri-radicular tissues.
The Journal features regular clinical updates, research reports and case reports from authors worldwide, and also publishes meeting abstracts, society news and historical endodontic glimpses.
The Australian Endodontic Journal is a publication for dentists in general and specialist practice devoted solely to endodontics. It aims to promote communication in the different fields that encompass endodontics for those dentists who have a special interest in endodontics.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
