Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회지)

Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Fracture Resistance of Incisal Tooth Fragment reattached with different Materials and Preparation

레진재료와 치아형성 방법에 따른 파절편 재부착치아의 파절저항성

  • Kim, Jongsung (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Kim, Gimin (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Lee, Jaesik (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Kim, Hyunjung (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Nam, Soonhyeun (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Kyungpook National University)
  • 김종성 (경북대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김기민 (경북대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 이제식 (경북대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 김현정 (경북대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실) ;
  • 남순현 (경북대학교 치의학대학원 소아치과학교실)
  • Received : 2021.10.15
  • Accepted : 2021.11.16
  • Published : 2022.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the fracture resistance of reattached tooth according to the resin materials and tooth preparation type under physiological conditions. Uncomplicated crown fracture in the oblique direction was reproduced on the extracted 64 anterior teeth. Depending on the composite resin material, reattachment was performed using a flowable resin and a packable resin. Depending on retentive forms, reattachment was performed using simple reattachment, 1.0 mm × 1.0 mm labial chamfer bevel, 1.0 mm × 1.0 mm lingual chamfer bevel and 1.0 mm × 1.0 mm circumferential bevel. A load was applied to the palatal surface of the tooth using a universal testing machine at an angle of 125 degree, which is the interincisal angle of normal children. Under the masticatory pressure condition, fracture resistance of lingual chamfer groups was 28.28 ± 7.41 MPa and 27.54 ± 4.45 MPa, which was significantly higher than those of simple reattachment groups, 17.21 ± 5.87 MPa and 20.10 ± 6.00 MPa, in both flowable and packable resin groups. When considering the lingual force similar to masticatory pressure, the fragment retention was significantly improved when the lingual chamfer was formed compared to the simple reattachment. Clinicians may consider the design of the lingual chamfer in order to improve fracture resistance to masticatory pressure during fragment reattachment.

이 연구의 목적은 생리적 조건에서 파절편 재부착 시 레진재료 및 유지형태에 따른 파절편의 파절저항성을 분석하는 것이다. 발거된 64개의 전치부 치아에 사선 방향의 단순치관파절을 재현하였다. 복합레진 재료에 따라서는 유동성 복합레진 및 응축형 복합레진을 이용하여 재부착을 실시하였다. 유지형태로는 단순 재부착, 1.0 mm × 1.0 mm 순측 chamfer bevel, 1.0 mm × 1.0 mm 설측 chamfer bevel 및 1.0 mm × 1.0 mm circumferential chamfer bevel을 부여한 후 재부착을 실시하였다. 만능재료시험기를 이용하여 재부착된 치아의 설측면에 정상 아동의 절치간각인 125°로 부하를 가하였다. 저작압 조건에서는 유동성 레진과 응축형 레진군 모두 설측 chamfer군의 파절저항강도는 28.28 ± 7.41 MPa과 27.54 ± 4.45 MPa로 단순 재부착군의 파절저항성강도인 17.21 ± 5.87 MPa과 20.10 ± 6.00 MPa보다 유의하게 더 높았다. 생리적인 저작압과 유사한 설측 방향의 힘을 고려 시 파절편 재부착치의 파절편 유지력은 단순 재부착술보다 설측 chamfer 유지형태를 형성하였을 때 유의하게 더 큰 유지력을 나타내었다. 이에 임상가는 파절편 재부착술 시 저작압에 대한 파절 저항성을 향상시키기 위해 설측 chamfer 유지형태의 설계를 고려할 수 있을 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abdulkhayum A, Munjal S, Lau M, et al. : In-Vitro Evaluation of Fracture Strength Recovery of Reattached Anterior Fractured Tooth Fragment Using Different Re-Attachment Techniques. J Clin Diagn Res, 8:208-211, 2014.
  2. Venugopal L, Lakshmi MN, Kiran VR, et al. : Comparative Evaluation of Impact Strength of Fragment Bonded Teeth and Intact Teeth: An In Vitro Study. J Int Oral Health, 6:73-76, 2014.
  3. Singhal R, Pathak A. Comparison of the fracture resistance of reattached incisor tooth fragments using 4 different materials. J Indian Soc Pedod Dent, 30:310-316, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.108927
  4. Andreasen JO, Andreasen FM : Textbook and color atlas of traumatic injuries to the teeth, 3rd ed. Mosby, St. Louis, 216-256, 1994.
  5. Macedo GV, Diaz PI, De OFCA, Ritter AV : Reattachment of anterior teeth fragments: a conservative approach. J Esthet Restor Dent, 20:5-18, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2008.00142.x
  6. Garcia FCP, Poubel DLN, Almeida JCF, et al. : Tooth fragment reattachment techniques-A systematic review. Dent Traumatol, 34:135-143, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12392
  7. Chosack A, Eildeman E : Rehabilitation of a fractured incisor uising the patient's natural crown. Case report. J Dent Child, 31:19-21, 1964.
  8. Garcia FCP, Poubel DLN, Almeida JCF, et al. : Tooth fragment reattachment techniques-A systematic review. Dent Traumatol, 34:135-143, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12392
  9. Lise DP, Vieira LC, Lopes GC, et al. : Tooth fragment reattachment: the natural restoration. Oper Dent, 37:584-590, 2012. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-063-t
  10. Reis A, Francci C, Loguercio AD, et al. : Re-attachment of anterior fractured teeth: fracture strength using different techniques. Oper Dent, 26:287-294, 2001.
  11. Olsburgh S, Jacoby T, Krejci I : Crown fractures in the permanent dentition: pulpal and restorative considerations. Dent Traumatol, 18:103-115, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-9657.2002.00004.x
  12. Osborne JW, Lambert RL : Reattachment of fractured incisal tooth segment. Gen Dent, 33:516-517, 1985.
  13. Demarco FF, Fay RM, Powers JM, et al. : Fracture resistance of re-attached coronal fragments-influence of different adhesive materials and bevel preparation. Dent Traumatol, 20:157-163, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-4469.2004.00221.x
  14. Davis MJ, Roth J, Levi M : Marginal integrity of adhesive fracture restorations: chamfer versus bevel. Quintessence Int Dent Dig, 14:1135-1146, 1983.
  15. Stokes AN, Hood JAA : Impact fracture patterns of intact and restored human maxillary central incisors. Int J Prost, 1:208-210, 1988.
  16. Andreasen FM, Noren JG, Linh-Stromberg U, et al. : Longterm survival of fragment bonding in the treatment of fractured crowns: a multicenter clinical study. Quintessence Int, 26:669-681, 1995.
  17. Kang HY, Chae YW, Nam OH, et al. : Long-Term Outcome of Reattached Tooth Fragment in Permanent Anterior Teeth of Children and Adolescents. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent, 48:42-49, 2021. https://doi.org/10.5933/JKAPD.2021.48.1.42
  18. Lee KH, Kim SM : A cephalometric study of Korean children by Ricketts' analysis. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent, 25:430-440, 1998.
  19. Baratieri LN, Ritter AV, Filho JCM, et al. : Tooth fragment reattachment: an alternative for restoration of fractured anterior teeth. Pract Periodont Aesthet Dent, 10:115-127, 1998.
  20. Murchison DF, Burke FJ, Worthington RB : Incisal edge reattachment: indications for use and clinical technique. Braz Dent J, 186:614-619, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800178
  21. Stokes AN, Hood JAA : Impact fracture characteristics of intact and crowned human central incisors. J Oral Rehabil, 20:89-95, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1993.tb01518.x
  22. Bhargava M, Pandit IK, Gupta M, et al. : An evaluation of various materials and tooth preparation designs used for reattachment of fractured incisors. Dent Traumatol, 26:409-412, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.2010.00913.x
  23. Andreasen JO : Adhesive dentistry applied to the treatment of traumatic dental injuries. Oper Dent, 26:328-335, 2001.
  24. Reis A, Francci C, Filho LER, et al. : Reattachment of anterior fractured teeth: fracture strength using different techniques. Oper Dent, 26:287-294, 2001.
  25. Anshu A, Saloni A, Kamal M, et al. : Comparison of Fracture Resistance of Different Reattachment Techniques and Adhesive Materials on Incisal Tooth Fragment Reattachment. J Dent Med Sci, 16:133-138, 2017.
  26. Chazine M, Sedda M, Grandini S, et al. : Evaluation of the fracture resistance of reattached incisal fragments using different materials and techniques. Dent Traumatol, 27:15-18, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.2010.00951.x
  27. Reis A, Kraul A, Loguercio AD, et al. Re-attachment of anterior fractured teeth: fracture strength using different materials. Oper Dent, 27:621-627, 2002.
  28. Zhang L, Ye N, Fok A, et al. : Effect of chamfer design on load capacity of reattached incisors. Dent Mater, 37:1168-1175, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2021.04.003
  29. Yikilgan, I, Guven, N, Kamak H, et al. : Efficacy of Palatal Applications on Fracture Resistance of Reattached Maxillary Central Incisors: An In Vitro Study. Appl Bionics Biomech, 2017:9124545, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9124545
  30. Wadhwani CPK : A single visit, multidisciplinary approach to the management of traumatic tooth crown fracture. Br Dent J, 188:593-598, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4800548a
  31. Raut AW, Mantri V, Mishra M, et al. : Management of complicated crown fracture by reattachment using fiber post: Minimal intervention approach. J Nat Sci Biol Med, 9:93-96, 2018. https://doi.org/10.4103/jnsbm.JNSBM_98_17