Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences
Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences Login  | Users Online: 132  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
    Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Online submission


ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 373-377

Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of incisor fragments using simple, bevel, internal groove preparation designs and reattached with nanocomposites: An in vitro study


1 Department of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry, YMT Dental College, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Chettinad Dental College & Research Institute, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu, India
3 Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Amrita School of Dentistry, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India

Correspondence Address:
Roshni Chandran
Department of Pedodontics & Preventive Dentistry, YMT Dental College, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra.
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_110_20

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the fracture resistance of anterior crown fragments using three different preparation designs and reattached using two different nanocomposites. Materials and Methods: A total of 120 sound human permanent incisors were selected and divided into six groups. The teeth were sectioned and reattached using different preparatory designs and nanocomposites. Group A (simple reattachment with G-aenial Universal Flo), Group A2 (bevel preparation reattached with G-aenial Universal Flo), Group A3 (internal groove preparation reattached with G-aenial Universal Flo), Group B1 (simple reattachment with Polofil NHT Flow), Group B2 (bevel preparation reattached with Polofil NHT Flow), and Group B3 (internal groove preparation reattached with Polofil NHT Flow). The teeth were sectioned and reattached using different preparatory designs and nanocomposites. These teeth were then subjected to thermocycling, and fracture resistance of the reattached fragments was recorded using Instron machine. Results: Group A3 showed the highest fracture resistance. The least fracture resistance was seen in Group B1. Conclusion: The fracture resistance of reattached incisor fragments depends mainly on the preparation design incorporated and also the material used to restore. Fragments where internal groove preparatory design was done and reattached with G-aenial Universal Flo, showed greater fracture resistance. Simple reattachment preparatory design showed the least fracture resistance, and hence must be avoided.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed64    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded10    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal