Patnana Arun Kumar, Vanga Narasimha Rao V, Vabbalareddy Rajasekhar, Chandrabhatla Srinivas Kumar
Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, GITAM Dental College and Hospital, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Indian J Dent Res. 2020 Jan-Feb;31(1):138-144. doi: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_465_18.
Laboratory reports show that fiber-reinforced composites have improved fracture resistance over traditional composites. However, limitations in the biomechanics of tests to evaluate the fracture resistance of fiber-reinforced composites need to be considered for accurate clinical applications.
To assess the fracture resistance of particulate filler composites, glass fiber-reinforced composites, and polyethylene-fiber reinforced composites by analyzing the different fracture types and failure patterns.
A standardized incisal (Group I) and mesioincisal fractures (Group II) were prepared on human maxillary central incisors. The test samples were further subdivided according to the restorative material used; particulate filler composites (Filtek Z 250), glass fiber-reinforced composites (fibre splint), and polyethylene-reinforced composites (Ribbond). The type of fractures was evaluated under the stereomicroscope and the failure patterns were analyzed using the graphical output from Universal Testing Machine.
The Chi-square test of association was used to test the association between fiber-reinforced composites and fracture resistance of tooth restoration complex.
No statistical association was observed between fiber-reinforced composites to the type of fractures in both incisal (P = 0.29) and mesioincisal restoration (P = 0.27). A significant association was observed between the fiber-reinforced composites to the failure patterns in both the incisal (P = 0.005) and mesioincisal restoration (P = 0.007).
The glass and polyethylene fiber-reinforced composites showed improved fracture resistance properties than the traditional particulate filler composites in both incisal and mesioincisal restorations.
实验室报告显示，纤维增强复合材料相比传统复合材料具有更高的抗折性。然而，为实现准确的临床应用，需要考虑评估纤维增强复合材料抗折性的测试在生物力学方面的局限性。
通过分析不同的骨折类型和失效模式，评估颗粒填充复合材料、玻璃纤维增强复合材料和聚乙烯纤维增强复合材料的抗折性。
在人类上颌中切牙上制备标准化的切端骨折（I组）和近中切端骨折（II组）。测试样本根据所用修复材料进一步细分；颗粒填充复合材料（Filtek Z 250）、玻璃纤维增强复合材料（纤维夹板）和聚乙烯增强复合材料（Ribbond）。在体视显微镜下评估骨折类型，并使用万能试验机的图形输出分析失效模式。
采用卡方关联检验来测试纤维增强复合材料与牙齿修复复合体抗折性之间的关联。
在切端骨折（P = 0.29）和近中切端修复（P = 0.27）中，未观察到纤维增强复合材料与骨折类型之间的统计学关联。在切端骨折（P = 0.005）和近中切端修复（P = 0.007）中，均观察到纤维增强复合材料与失效模式之间存在显著关联。
在切端和近中切端修复中，玻璃和聚乙烯纤维增强复合材料比传统颗粒填充复合材料表现出更好的抗折性。
