冠状骨水泥基托及其厚度对根管治疗牙体抗折性的影响

C. Yıldırım, Uğur Aydın, A. Ozsevik, F. Aksoy, Samet Tosun
{"title":"冠状骨水泥基托及其厚度对根管治疗牙体抗折性的影响","authors":"C. Yıldırım, Uğur Aydın, A. Ozsevik, F. Aksoy, Samet Tosun","doi":"10.4103/2321-4619.150015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with mesiodistocclusal (MOD) cavities restored with only composite resin, 3 mm glass-ionomer cement (GIC) base + composite resin, and 5 mm GIC base + composite resin. Materials and Methods: Fifty extracted intact mandibular molars were randomly divided into five groups each including 10 teeth. Group 1: No cavity preparation or endodontic treatment was applied (intact teeth). Group 2-5: Root canals were prepared with step-back technique and filled lateral condensation of gutta-percha and sealer. Group 2: No coronal restoration was achieved. Group 3: Teeth were coronally restored with only composite resin. Group 4: Coronal restorations were performed with composite resin following 3 mm GIC base placement. Group 5: Composite resin placed over 5 mm GIC base. After finishing and polishing, all specimens were kept in an incubator at 37°C in 100% humidity for 24 h and fracture resistance was tested with a Universal Testing Machine. Mean force load for each sample was recorded in Newtons (N). Results were statistically analyzed with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc Tukey′s tests. Results: The mean force required to fracture each sample was as follows: Group 1: 2,745.3; Group 2: 325.9; Group 3: 1,958.1; Group 4: 1,756.3; and Group 5: 1,889.1. Fracture resistance of intact teeth (Group 1) was significantly higher than all other groups. Fracture resistance of teeth in Group 2 (not coronally restored) was significantly lower than all other groups. Fracture resistance values of other three experimental groups (Groups 3, 4, and 5) were not significantly different from each other. Conclusion: Placing a GIC base and its thickness did not significantly affect the fracture resistance compared with composite resin alone.","PeriodicalId":17076,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Restorative Dentistry","volume":"44 1","pages":"8 - 13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of coronal cement base and its thickness on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth\",\"authors\":\"C. Yıldırım, Uğur Aydın, A. Ozsevik, F. Aksoy, Samet Tosun\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/2321-4619.150015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with mesiodistocclusal (MOD) cavities restored with only composite resin, 3 mm glass-ionomer cement (GIC) base + composite resin, and 5 mm GIC base + composite resin. Materials and Methods: Fifty extracted intact mandibular molars were randomly divided into five groups each including 10 teeth. Group 1: No cavity preparation or endodontic treatment was applied (intact teeth). Group 2-5: Root canals were prepared with step-back technique and filled lateral condensation of gutta-percha and sealer. Group 2: No coronal restoration was achieved. Group 3: Teeth were coronally restored with only composite resin. Group 4: Coronal restorations were performed with composite resin following 3 mm GIC base placement. Group 5: Composite resin placed over 5 mm GIC base. After finishing and polishing, all specimens were kept in an incubator at 37°C in 100% humidity for 24 h and fracture resistance was tested with a Universal Testing Machine. Mean force load for each sample was recorded in Newtons (N). Results were statistically analyzed with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc Tukey′s tests. Results: The mean force required to fracture each sample was as follows: Group 1: 2,745.3; Group 2: 325.9; Group 3: 1,958.1; Group 4: 1,756.3; and Group 5: 1,889.1. Fracture resistance of intact teeth (Group 1) was significantly higher than all other groups. Fracture resistance of teeth in Group 2 (not coronally restored) was significantly lower than all other groups. Fracture resistance values of other three experimental groups (Groups 3, 4, and 5) were not significantly different from each other. Conclusion: Placing a GIC base and its thickness did not significantly affect the fracture resistance compared with composite resin alone.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Restorative Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"8 - 13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Restorative Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/2321-4619.150015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2321-4619.150015","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

目的:比较单纯复合树脂、3mm玻璃离子水泥基基+复合树脂和5mm玻璃离子水泥基基+复合树脂修复中牙离断(MOD)牙槽的抗折性。材料与方法:50颗拔出的完整下颌磨牙随机分为5组,每组10颗。组1:未做空腔预备或根管治疗(完整牙)。2-5组:采用退步技术制备根管,填充杜胶和封闭剂的侧缩。组2:未完成冠状面修复。第三组:冠状面仅用复合树脂修复。第4组:冠状面修复采用复合树脂,放置3mm GIC基托。第五组:复合树脂放置在5毫米的GIC底座上。所有标本整理抛光后,在37℃、100%湿度的培养箱中保存24 h,用万能试验机进行抗断裂性能测试。每个样本的平均力负荷以牛顿(N)为单位记录。结果采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)和事后Tukey检验进行统计分析。结果:各试样断裂所需平均力为:第一组:2,745.3;第二组:325.9;第三组:1,958.1;第4组:1,756.3;第5组:1,889.1。1组完整牙的抗折能力显著高于其他各组。2组(非冠状修复组)牙体抗折性明显低于其他各组。其他3个实验组(第3、4、5组)的断裂阻力值差异无统计学意义。结论:与单独放置复合树脂相比,放置GIC基板及其厚度对其抗断裂性能无显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of coronal cement base and its thickness on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth
Objective: To compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with mesiodistocclusal (MOD) cavities restored with only composite resin, 3 mm glass-ionomer cement (GIC) base + composite resin, and 5 mm GIC base + composite resin. Materials and Methods: Fifty extracted intact mandibular molars were randomly divided into five groups each including 10 teeth. Group 1: No cavity preparation or endodontic treatment was applied (intact teeth). Group 2-5: Root canals were prepared with step-back technique and filled lateral condensation of gutta-percha and sealer. Group 2: No coronal restoration was achieved. Group 3: Teeth were coronally restored with only composite resin. Group 4: Coronal restorations were performed with composite resin following 3 mm GIC base placement. Group 5: Composite resin placed over 5 mm GIC base. After finishing and polishing, all specimens were kept in an incubator at 37°C in 100% humidity for 24 h and fracture resistance was tested with a Universal Testing Machine. Mean force load for each sample was recorded in Newtons (N). Results were statistically analyzed with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post-hoc Tukey′s tests. Results: The mean force required to fracture each sample was as follows: Group 1: 2,745.3; Group 2: 325.9; Group 3: 1,958.1; Group 4: 1,756.3; and Group 5: 1,889.1. Fracture resistance of intact teeth (Group 1) was significantly higher than all other groups. Fracture resistance of teeth in Group 2 (not coronally restored) was significantly lower than all other groups. Fracture resistance values of other three experimental groups (Groups 3, 4, and 5) were not significantly different from each other. Conclusion: Placing a GIC base and its thickness did not significantly affect the fracture resistance compared with composite resin alone.
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