These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Reattachment of anterior fractured teeth: effect of materials and techniques on impact strength.
    Author: Bruschi-Alonso RC, Alonso RC, Correr GM, Alves MC, Lewgoy HR, Sinhoreti MA, Puppin-Rontani RM, Correr-Sobrinho L.
    Journal: Dent Traumatol; 2010 Aug; 26(4):315-22. PubMed ID: 20662884.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND/AIM: The reattachment of dental fragments, as a conservative treatment, should be the first choice to restore fractured teeth. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different materials and reattachment techniques on impact strength of bovine incisors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Standardized fragments were obtained when 80 crowns were sectioned 12 mm from the incisal edge. Teeth were mounted in PVC rings, embedded in acrylic resin and polyether to simulate bone support and periodontal ligament. Specimens were distributed in nine groups (n = 10), according to the reattachment technique (Direct bonding or Circumferential chamfer); the adhesive system (Single Bond or Clearfil SE Bond); and the intermediated material (Filtek Z350 Flow or Rely X CRA). Sound teeth composed the control group. Circumferential chamfer was prepared after the bonding of the fragment by means of a spherical point and filled with the composite Filtek Z250. The impact strength was evaluated in a universal testing machine Instron. A compressive load was applied at a crosshead speed of 500 mm min(-1) on the buccal surface, 2 mm from the incisal edge. Data were submitted to anova and Ryan-Einot-Gabriel-Welsch Multiple Range test (5%). RESULTS: Mean value of impact strength for control group was 64.8 Kgf. The fragment reattachment using Circumferential chamfer was significantly superior to Direct Bonding. The use of Single Bond significantly increased the impact strength when compared to the use of Clearfil SE. There was no significant difference among Rely X and Filtek X350 Flow. CONCLUSION: No technique or material, when individually considered, was capable of achieving the mechanical strength of the sound teeth; however, the association of reattachment technique Circumferential chamfer with bonding system Single Bond could approximate the immediate impact strength of the restored teeth to that observed in the sound teeth.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]