Premium
Evaluation of the fracture resistance of reattached incisal fragments using different materials and techniques
Author(s) -
Chazine Michelle,
Sedda Maurizio,
Ounsi Hani F.,
Paragliola Raffaele,
Ferrari Marco,
Grandini Simone
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
dental traumatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.82
H-Index - 81
eISSN - 1600-9657
pISSN - 1600-4469
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2010.00951.x
Subject(s) - fracture (geology) , resistance (ecology) , forensic engineering , dentistry , orthodontics , engineering , materials science , composite material , medicine , biology , ecology
– Objectives : When coronal fracture occurs in anterior teeth, fragment reattachment can be a valid alternative to a direct restoration. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the material and the technique used to reattach the fragment. Materials and methods : Eighty sound maxillary and mandibular incisors were selected and randomly divided into eight groups ( n = 10). The incisal third of each tooth was removed using a saw machine. The fragments in groups 1–4 were reattached using resin‐based materials: group 1 adhesive, group 2 flow, group 3 composite, group 4 cement; in groups 5–8, the same materials mentioned before were used but a bevel was also performed on both labial and lingual surfaces. Shear bond strength (SBS) was calculated by applying a load incisal to the reattachment line. A two‐way Anova was used to evaluate the influence of materials and techniques on the SBS. Results : The technique used was statistically significant ( P < 0.001), while the material was not ( P = 0.793). Conclusions : The choice of material seems to have no influence on the SBS, whereas a bevel performed on the labial and lingual surfaces can significantly improve the SBS of the reattached fragment.