Arora Vimal, Sharma M C, Dwivedi Ravi
DGDS & Col Commandant, AD Corps, 'L' Block, IHQ of MoD (Army), New Delhi 110 001, India.
Prof & Head, (Prosthodontics), Maitri Dental College & Research Centre, Anjora, Durg, Chattisgarh, India.
Med J Armed Forces India. 2014 Jan;70(1):53-7. doi: 10.1016/j.mjafi.2013.03.011. Epub 2013 Aug 20.
Little consensus exist in suitable tooth preparation design and alloy pre-treatment methods for improving the retention of resin bonded fixed partial dentures (RBFPDs).
An in-vitro experiment was done with four designs. Group A: standard form, B: wings and proximal slices, C: wings, proximal slice and grooves, D: wings, proximal slice, grooves and occlusal coverage. Alloys were subjected to pre-treatment procedures like Group I: control, II: sand blasting, III: electro etching, IV: tin plating. Debonding forces of the castings were recorded in a universal testing machine and results were analyzed by student's 't' test.
Group B, C and D showed higher debonding forces compared to A. However, there were no significant differences in mean force values among Groups B, C and D. Group II, III and IV with different alloy pre-treatment methods demonstrated higher values against control. Inter group variations among Group II, III and IV were not significant.
Tooth preparation with adequate surface extensions and pre-treatment procedures of casting alloys are two parameters that play important role in determining the retentive features of RBFPDs. Different types of tooth preparation designs and alloy pre-treatment methods exert almost similar influence in increasing the retention of acid etched RBFPDs.
在合适的牙体预备设计和合金预处理方法以提高树脂粘结固定局部义齿(RBFPDs)的固位力方面,存在的共识很少。
进行了一项体外实验,有四种设计。A组:标准形态;B组:翼板和邻面片切;C组:翼板、邻面片切和沟;D组:翼板、邻面片切、沟和咬合面覆盖。合金进行如下预处理程序:I组:对照;II组:喷砂;III组:电解蚀刻;IV组:镀锡。在万能试验机上记录铸件的脱粘力,并通过学生t检验分析结果。
与A组相比,B组、C组和D组显示出更高的脱粘力。然而,B组、C组和D组之间的平均力值没有显著差异。采用不同合金预处理方法的II组、III组和IV组显示出比对照组更高的值。II组、III组和IV组之间的组间差异不显著。
具有足够表面延伸的牙体预备和铸造合金的预处理程序是决定RBFPDs固位特征的两个重要参数。不同类型的牙体预备设计和合金预处理方法在增加酸蚀RBFPDs的固位力方面发挥着几乎相似的影响。