Comparison of Fracture Resistance of Primary Incisors Restored with Different Intracanal-Reinforcement Materials
Fouad Salama,1 Faika Abdelmegid,2 Mohammed Alhussain,3 Hasan Muaddi,3 Nassr AlMaflehi,4 Latifa Alhowaish1 1Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 2Department of Oral Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry,...
Guardado en:
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | article |
Lenguaje: | EN |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/bc946bd87e754973945db52e8db63a7d |
Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
id |
oai:doaj.org-article:bc946bd87e754973945db52e8db63a7d |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:bc946bd87e754973945db52e8db63a7d2021-12-02T19:17:36ZComparison of Fracture Resistance of Primary Incisors Restored with Different Intracanal-Reinforcement Materials1179-1357https://doaj.org/article/bc946bd87e754973945db52e8db63a7d2021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.dovepress.com/comparison-of-fracture-resistance-of-primary-incisors-restored-with-di-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-CCIDEhttps://doaj.org/toc/1179-1357Fouad Salama,1 Faika Abdelmegid,2 Mohammed Alhussain,3 Hasan Muaddi,3 Nassr AlMaflehi,4 Latifa Alhowaish1 1Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 2Department of Oral Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; 3College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; 4Department of Periodontics and Community Dentistry, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi ArabiaCorrespondence: Latifa Alhowaish Email lalhowaish@ksu.edu.saAim: To evaluate the effects of placing short posts made of different restorative materials on the fracture resistance of root canals in primary incisors of primary teeth.Materials and Methods: The root canals of 40 extracted primary incisors were prepared and filled with Vitapex and randomly divided into five groups of 8 each. In Groups 1– 4, a post space was created and filled with different restorative materials (Tetric® N-Ceram Bulk Fill, AeliteFlo, Filtek Z250 XT, and GC Fuji II LC® capsule), while Group 5 was kept filled with Vitapex as a control. Fracture resistance was measured using a universal testing machine at a 0.5-mm/min crosshead speed. The results were statistically analyzed and compared.Results: The highest fracture resistance was recorded for GC Fuji II LC capsules [439.82 N] and control [423.37 N], while the lowest fracture resistance was recorded for Tetric® N Ceram Bulk Fill (239.91 N). A multiple comparison test showed that the Tetric® N-Ceram Bulk Fill had a significantly lower average value than AeliteFlo (P = 0.030), as well as a significantly lower average value than GC Fuji II LC® capsule (P = 0.001), and a significantly lower average value than the control group (P = 0.002). Multiple comparison tests showed no significant difference between Tetric® N-Ceram Bulk Fill and Filtek Z250 XT (P = 0.39).Conclusion: The fracture resistance of primary incisor root canals differs according to the material used for the intracanal posts. Three-millimeter intracanal posts in the primary incisors showed the highest fracture resistance for the teeth restored with GC Fuji II LC capsules and the control.Keywords: fracture resistance, intracanal posts, primary incisors, resin compositeSalama FAbdelmegid FAlhussain MMuaddi HAlMaflehi NAlhowaish LDove Medical Pressarticlefracture resistanceintracanal postsprimary incisorsresin compositeDentistryRK1-715ENClinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry, Vol Volume 13, Pp 507-512 (2021) |
institution |
DOAJ |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
EN |
topic |
fracture resistance intracanal posts primary incisors resin composite Dentistry RK1-715 |
spellingShingle |
fracture resistance intracanal posts primary incisors resin composite Dentistry RK1-715 Salama F Abdelmegid F Alhussain M Muaddi H AlMaflehi N Alhowaish L Comparison of Fracture Resistance of Primary Incisors Restored with Different Intracanal-Reinforcement Materials |
description |
Fouad Salama,1 Faika Abdelmegid,2 Mohammed Alhussain,3 Hasan Muaddi,3 Nassr AlMaflehi,4 Latifa Alhowaish1 1Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 2Department of Oral Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; 3College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; 4Department of Periodontics and Community Dentistry, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi ArabiaCorrespondence: Latifa Alhowaish Email lalhowaish@ksu.edu.saAim: To evaluate the effects of placing short posts made of different restorative materials on the fracture resistance of root canals in primary incisors of primary teeth.Materials and Methods: The root canals of 40 extracted primary incisors were prepared and filled with Vitapex and randomly divided into five groups of 8 each. In Groups 1– 4, a post space was created and filled with different restorative materials (Tetric® N-Ceram Bulk Fill, AeliteFlo, Filtek Z250 XT, and GC Fuji II LC® capsule), while Group 5 was kept filled with Vitapex as a control. Fracture resistance was measured using a universal testing machine at a 0.5-mm/min crosshead speed. The results were statistically analyzed and compared.Results: The highest fracture resistance was recorded for GC Fuji II LC capsules [439.82 N] and control [423.37 N], while the lowest fracture resistance was recorded for Tetric® N Ceram Bulk Fill (239.91 N). A multiple comparison test showed that the Tetric® N-Ceram Bulk Fill had a significantly lower average value than AeliteFlo (P = 0.030), as well as a significantly lower average value than GC Fuji II LC® capsule (P = 0.001), and a significantly lower average value than the control group (P = 0.002). Multiple comparison tests showed no significant difference between Tetric® N-Ceram Bulk Fill and Filtek Z250 XT (P = 0.39).Conclusion: The fracture resistance of primary incisor root canals differs according to the material used for the intracanal posts. Three-millimeter intracanal posts in the primary incisors showed the highest fracture resistance for the teeth restored with GC Fuji II LC capsules and the control.Keywords: fracture resistance, intracanal posts, primary incisors, resin composite |
format |
article |
author |
Salama F Abdelmegid F Alhussain M Muaddi H AlMaflehi N Alhowaish L |
author_facet |
Salama F Abdelmegid F Alhussain M Muaddi H AlMaflehi N Alhowaish L |
author_sort |
Salama F |
title |
Comparison of Fracture Resistance of Primary Incisors Restored with Different Intracanal-Reinforcement Materials |
title_short |
Comparison of Fracture Resistance of Primary Incisors Restored with Different Intracanal-Reinforcement Materials |
title_full |
Comparison of Fracture Resistance of Primary Incisors Restored with Different Intracanal-Reinforcement Materials |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of Fracture Resistance of Primary Incisors Restored with Different Intracanal-Reinforcement Materials |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of Fracture Resistance of Primary Incisors Restored with Different Intracanal-Reinforcement Materials |
title_sort |
comparison of fracture resistance of primary incisors restored with different intracanal-reinforcement materials |
publisher |
Dove Medical Press |
publishDate |
2021 |
url |
https://doaj.org/article/bc946bd87e754973945db52e8db63a7d |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT salamaf comparisonoffractureresistanceofprimaryincisorsrestoredwithdifferentintracanalreinforcementmaterials AT abdelmegidf comparisonoffractureresistanceofprimaryincisorsrestoredwithdifferentintracanalreinforcementmaterials AT alhussainm comparisonoffractureresistanceofprimaryincisorsrestoredwithdifferentintracanalreinforcementmaterials AT muaddih comparisonoffractureresistanceofprimaryincisorsrestoredwithdifferentintracanalreinforcementmaterials AT almaflehin comparisonoffractureresistanceofprimaryincisorsrestoredwithdifferentintracanalreinforcementmaterials AT alhowaishl comparisonoffractureresistanceofprimaryincisorsrestoredwithdifferentintracanalreinforcementmaterials |
_version_ |
1718376875247534080 |