Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of teeth restored with different types of restorative material- An in vitro study.

Abstract

The development of adhesive dental materials resulted in good chemical bonding to tooth structure. However, they are still lacking in color s stability and strength in oral environment over a long period of time. Duo to these disadvantages of dental materials, amalgam restoration is still preferable as the restorations of choice for posterior region. The use of adhesive resins to increase the retention, resistance and marginal seal of amalgam restoration has gained a strong foothold in restorative dentistry. The advantage of bonded restoration is the conservation of tooth structure as well as tooth reinforcement. The aim of the study was to investigate and compare the fracture resistance of conventional amalgam restoration with bonded amalgam, pin retained amalgam restoration and composite restoration and influence of bonded amalgam restoration on the fracture resistance of mandibular molars and to determine whether bonding amalgam are suitable alternative to the pin retained amalgam restoration system. Seventy five extracted mandibular molars were randomly divided in to five groups including one control group. A mesio-occlusal preparation including lingual cusp was performed on all the teeth. Group 1 serves as negative control group with no tooth preparation. Group 2 were restored with conventional restoration. Group 3 were restored with bonded amalgam restoration. Group 4 were restored with pin retained amalgam restoration. Group 5 were restored with posterior composite (Micro hybrid) restoration. All the specimens were mounted in acrylic block and thermocycled. Each specimen was loaded in compression at 90 degree angle in an Instron testing machine with cross head speed of 5mm/min. The load required to fracture the teeth were graphically recorded in Newton and data obtained were subjected to statistical analysis.

Authors and Affiliations

Dr. Surya Narayan Rai

Keywords

Related Articles

Biomechanical Stress Analysis of Mandibular First Permanent Molar Restored with Different Restorative Materials : A 3-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis.

Normal mastication with its varying magnitude and direction generates extensive intransigent stresses in teeth and their supporting tissues. The structure of the human tooth and its supporting tissues is a multifarious a...

Comparative Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of Multiple Implant Impressions Using 3 Different Impression Materials Analyzed Immediately, After 24 Hours & After 2 Pours – An In-Vitro Study.

Objectives: The accuracy of the definitive cast to a large extent is dependent on the impression technique, impression material, splinting (if used), and cast material in order to achieve passively fitting implant – reta...

Temperomandibular Joint & its disorders with Recent Advances in its Management – A Review.

Temporomandibular joint dysfunction is a complex and multifactorial disorder of orofacial region. The usual complain of the patients with this syndrome are pain in the area of the jaw and associated muscles, eating probl...

Comparative Evaluation of Transverse Strength of Conventional Denture Base Resin with Reinforced Denture Base Resin: An In-Vitro Study.

Statement of problem: Fracture strength of denture base resins is of great concern, and many approaches have been used to strengthen acrylic resin dentures. Purpose: This study measured the effect of three fibre strengt...

Management of Hemiseptal Defect In Maxillary Anterior Tooth – A Case Report.

Intrabony defect can create serious functional and aesthetic problems. In such situations, a combined endodontic and periodontal treatment is often indicated. The goal of the surgical periodontal therapy is to regenerate...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP590275
  • DOI -
  • Views 29
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Dr. Surya Narayan Rai (2019). Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of teeth restored with different types of restorative material- An in vitro study.. International Journal of Dental Science and Innovative Research (IJDSIR), 2(3), 44-50. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-590275