Re-attachment of anterior fractured teeth: Fracture strength using different techniques

Citation
A. Reis et al., Re-attachment of anterior fractured teeth: Fracture strength using different techniques, OPER DENT, 26(3), 2001, pp. 287-294
Citations number
39
Categorie Soggetti
Dentistry/Oral Surgery & Medicine
Journal title
OPERATIVE DENTISTRY
ISSN journal
03617734 → ACNP
Volume
26
Issue
3
Year of publication
2001
Pages
287 - 294
Database
ISI
SICI code
0361-7734(200105/06)26:3<287:ROAFTF>2.0.ZU;2-U
Abstract
Fracture of anterior teeth by trauma is a common problem in children and te enagers. Complex metal-ceramic crowns with considerable loss of remaining s ound structure are no longer necessary due to adhesive techniques, such as composite restorations and re-attachment techniques. This study compared th e fracture strength of sound and restored anterior teeth using a resin comp osite and four re-attachment techniques. A "one bottle" adhesive system (On e-Step, BISCO) and a dual cure resin cement (Duo-Link, BISCO) were applied. Thirty-five sound permanent lower central incisors were fractured by an ax ial load applied to the buccal area and randomly divided into five groups. The teeth were restored as follows: 1) bonded only = just bonding the fragm ent; 2) chamfer-group = after bonding, a chamfer was prepared on the enamel at the bonding line and filled with composite; 3) overcontour group = afte r bonding, a thin composite overcontour was applied on the buccal surface a round the fracture line; 4) internal dentinal groove = before bonding an in ternal groove was made and filled with a resin composite; 5) resin composit e group = after a bevel preparation on the enamel edge, the adhesive system was applied and the fractured part of the teeth rebuilt by resin composite . Restored teeth were subjected to the same loading in the same buccal area . Fracture strength after restorative procedure was expressed as a percenta ge of the original fracture strength and the results analyzed by Kruskal-Wa llis statistical analysis. The mean percentages of fracture strength were: Group 1: 37.09%, Group 2: 60.62%, Group 3: 97.2%.