Role of reinforcement methods in retention of composite restorations of primary anterior teeth
Journal of Dental School,
Vol. 35 No. 4 (2017),
27 October 2017
,
Page 118-121
https://doi.org/10.22037/jds.v35i4.24588
Abstract
Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the retention of composite restorations of primary anterior teeth reinforced with composite posts, glass fiber posts, para-pulpal pins with composite posts, and para-pulpal pins alone.
Methods Forty freshly extracted sound primary canine teeth with at least two-third of the root length remaining were selected. After disinfection, the tooth crown was cut perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. Root canals were prepared and filled using zinc oxide eugenol paste. The teeth were randomly allocated into four groups and restored using one of the following: Composite posts, glass fiber posts, para- pulpal pins with composite posts, and para-pulpal pins alone. Composite cores were constructed while a preformed U-shaped orthodontic wire was placed in the composite tip, samples were then placed in a universal testing machine for measurement of retention. The minimum force required to dislodge the restoration or cause fracture was considered as the retentive strength. The collected data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (P < 0.05).
Results There were statistically significant differences between groups (P = 0.011). The mean retention in the para-pulpal pins with composite post group (131.72 ± 32.35N) was greater than that in composite posts (93.65 ± 24.45N), glass fiber post (95.92 ± 25.35N), and the para-pulpal pin group (95.34 ± 29.56N) (P < 0.05). Other differences were not significant (P > 0.05).
Conclusion para-Pulpal pin alone may not help in improving the retention of full crown restoration of primary anterior teeth. However, when used along with a composite post, it appears to improve the retention of restoration.
- deciduous
- dental pins
- dental restoration
- permanent
- retention
- tooth
How to Cite
References
Usha M, Deepak V, Venkat S, Gargi M. Treatment of severely mutilated incisors: a challenge to the pedodontist. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2007;25:34.
Mittal N, Bhatia HP, Haider K. Methods of intracanal reinforcement in primary anterior teeth: assessing the outcomes through a systematic literature review. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2015;8:48–54.
Woo D, Sheller B, Williams B, Mancl L, Grembowski D. Dentists’ and parents’ perceptions of health, esthetics, and treatment of maxillary primary incisors. Pediatr Dent. 2005;27:19–23.
Waggoner WF. Restoring primary anterior teeth: updated for 2014. Pediatr Dent. 2015;37:163–170.
Lopes GC, Vieira LCC, Araujo E. Direct composite resin restorations: a review of some clinical procedures to achieve predictable results in posterior teeth. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2004;16:19–31.
Viera C, Ribeiro C. Polyethylene fiber tape used as a post and core in decayed primary anterior teeth: a treatment option. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2001;26:1–4.
Webb EL, Straka WF, Phillips CL. Retention of self-threading pins with reduced stress from insertion. J Prosthet Dent. 1986;56:684–688.
Ansari G, Mashhadi Abbas F, Malekafzali B, Yarmohammadi R. Crazing Level after pin insertion in anterior primary teeth: a preliminary in vitro study. J Dent Sch. 2017;35:9–14.
Papa J, Wilson P, Tyas M. Pins for direct restorations. J Dent. 1993;21:259– 264.
Attin T, Hellwig E, Hilgers R, Zimmermann U. Fracture toughness of pin-retained class 4 restorations. Oper Dent. 1994;19:110–115.
Andrade CL, Gonçalves TM, Santos ÍL, Barros MS, Araújo NR, Cury AA. Direct adhesive pin-retained restorations for severely worn dentition treatment: A 1.5-year follow-up report. Braz Dent J. 2014;25:357–362.
Memarpour M, Shafiei F, Abbaszadeh M. Retentive strength of different intracanal posts in restorations of anterior primary teeth: an in vitro study. Restor Dent Endod. 2013;38:215–221.
Pithan S, de Sousa Vieira R, Chain MC. Tensile bond strength of intracanal posts in primary anterior teeth: an in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2003;27:35–39.
Gujjar KR, Indushekar K. Comparison of the retentive strength of 3 different posts in restoring badly broken primary maxillary incisors. J Dent Child (Chic). 2010;77:17–24.
- Abstract Viewed: 298 times
- PDF Downloaded: 268 times