Bolli Rashmi Venkatesh, Margasahayam Sumanthini V, Shenoy Vanitha U, Agrawal Aanchal M
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, MGM Dental College and Hospital, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
J Conserv Dent. 2020 Mar-Apr;23(2):174-179. doi: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_345_19. Epub 2020 Nov 5.
The aim of the study was to compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with simulated invasive cervical resorption cavities, restored with different restorative materials, namely, conventional glass-ionomer cement (CGIC), resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC), flowable composite (FC), and giomer.
Sixty extracted human permanent maxillary central incisor teeth were assigned to six groups,which were, Group 1 (intact teeth, control), Group 2 (teeth with biomechanical preparation and resorption cavity), Group 3 (CGIC), Group 4 (RMGIC), Group 5 (FC), and Group 6 (giomer). Except for Group 1, other groups were subjected to endodontic treatment. Teeth of Group 2 were left unobturated and teeth of Groups 3-6 were obturated. A simulated resorption cavity was prepared labially in the specimens belonging to Groups 2-6 and restored with respective restorative materials. The specimens were subjected to compressive load until failure in an Instron testing machine and the load at failure was recorded in Newtons.
The data obtained were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA, pair-wise comparison was made with Tukey's multiple comparison test, and < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
There was a statistically significant difference in the fracture resistance of intact teeth and endodontically treated teeth with simulated invasive cervical resorption cavities restored with different adhesive restorative materials. Among the restored teeth, there was no significant difference.
Intact teeth were found to have the highest resistance to fracture followed by those restored with giomer, FC, RMGIC, and CGIC in that order.
本研究旨在比较经根管治疗且有模拟侵袭性颈部吸收腔的牙齿，用不同修复材料修复后的抗折性能，这些修复材料分别为传统玻璃离子水门汀（CGIC）、树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀（RMGIC）、流动树脂（FC）和聚酸改性复合树脂（giomer）。
60颗拔除的人上颌恒中切牙被分为六组，即第1组（完整牙齿，对照组）、第2组（进行生物力学预备并存在吸收腔的牙齿）、第3组（CGIC修复）、第4组（RMGIC修复）、第5组（FC修复）和第6组（giomer修复）。除第1组外，其他组均进行根管治疗。第2组牙齿不进行充填，第3 - 6组牙齿进行充填。在第2 - 6组的标本唇侧制备模拟吸收腔，并用相应的修复材料进行修复。将标本在Instron试验机上施加压缩载荷直至破坏，记录破坏时的载荷，单位为牛顿。
对获得的数据进行单因素方差分析，采用Tukey多重比较检验进行两两比较，P < 0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
完整牙齿以及经根管治疗且有模拟侵袭性颈部吸收腔并用不同粘结修复材料修复的牙齿，其抗折性能存在统计学显著差异。在修复后的牙齿中，无显著差异。
发现完整牙齿的抗折性最高，其次依次是用giomer、FC、RMGIC和CGIC修复的牙齿。
