Subash Dayalan, Shoba Krishnamma, Aman Shibu, Bharkavi Srinivasan Kumar Indu, Nimmi Vijayan, Abhilash Radhakrishnan
Senior Resident, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College, Kottayam, Kerala, India.
Head, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College, Kottayam, Kerala, India.
J Clin Diagn Res. 2017 Sep;11(9):ZC68-ZC70. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/28263.10625. Epub 2017 Sep 1.
The restoration of a severely damaged tooth usually needs a post and core as a part of treatment procedure to provide a corono - radicular stabilization. Biodentine is a class of dental material which possess high mechanical properties with excellent biocompatibility and bioactive behaviour. The sealing ability coupled with optimum physical properties could make Biodentine an excellent option as a core material.
The aim of the study was to determine the fracture resistance of Biodentine as a core material in comparison with resin modified glass ionomer and composite resin.
Freshly extracted 30 human permanent maxillary central incisors were selected. After endodontic treatment followed by post space preparation and luting of Glass fibre post (Reforpost, Angelus), the samples were divided in to three groups based on the type of core material. The core build-up used in Group I was Biodentine (Septodont, France), Group II was Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (GC, Japan) and Group III was Hybrid Composite Resin (TeEconom plus, Ivoclar vivadent). The specimens were subjected to fracture toughness using Universal testing machine (1474, Zwick/Roell, Germany) and results were compared using One-way analysis of variance with Tukey's Post hoc test.
The results showed that there was significant difference between groups in terms of fracture load. Also, composite resin exhibited highest mean fracture load (1039.9 N), whereas teeth restored with Biodentine demonstrated the lowest mean fracture load (176.66 N). Resin modified glass ionomer exhibited intermediate fracture load (612.07 N). The primary mode of failure in Group I and Group II was favourable (100%) while unfavourable fracture was seen in Group III (30%).
Biodentine, does not satisfy the requirements to be used as an ideal core material. The uses of RMGIC's as a core build-up material should be limited to non-stress bearing areas. Composite resin is still the best core build-up material owing to its high fracture resistance and bonding to tooth.
严重受损牙齿的修复通常需要桩核作为治疗程序的一部分,以提供冠根稳定。生物活性玻璃是一类牙科材料,具有高机械性能、优异的生物相容性和生物活性。其密封能力以及最佳的物理性能,使其成为一种出色的核材料选择。
本研究的目的是比较生物活性玻璃作为核材料与树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀和复合树脂的抗折强度。
选取30颗新鲜拔除的人上颌恒中切牙。在进行根管治疗、制备桩道并粘结玻璃纤维桩(Reforpost,安杰卢斯公司)后,根据核材料类型将样本分为三组。第一组使用生物活性玻璃(法国Septodont公司)进行核修复,第二组使用树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀(日本GC公司),第三组使用混合复合树脂(TeEconom plus,义获嘉伟瓦登特公司)。使用万能材料试验机(德国Zwick/Roell公司的1474型)对样本进行断裂韧性测试,并使用单因素方差分析和Tukey事后检验比较结果。
结果显示各组在断裂载荷方面存在显著差异。此外,复合树脂表现出最高的平均断裂载荷(1039.9 N),而用生物活性玻璃修复的牙齿平均断裂载荷最低(176.66 N)。树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀表现出中等断裂载荷(612.07 N)。第一组和第二组的主要失败模式是有利的(100%),而第三组出现了不利的骨折(30%)。
生物活性玻璃不满足用作理想核材料的要求。树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀作为核修复材料的使用应限于非应力承载区域。由于其高抗折性和与牙齿的粘结性,复合树脂仍然是最佳的核修复材料。