ABSTRACT
Abstract Although fiber-reinforced composites are commonly used in dental practice, whether fiber-reinforced crowns and fixed partial dentures can be used as definitive prostheses remains to be determined. This study used scanning electron microscopy to evaluate the load-bearing capacity of non-reinforced and fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) molar crowns prepared by computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM). The crowns were fabricated from three empirical FRC blocks, one empirical composite block, and one commercial ceramic block. The FRC resin was prepared by mixing BaO silicate particles, E-glass fiber, and dimethacrylate resin. Specimens were divided into five groups (n = 10), differing in the amounts of filler, resin, and fiber. Crowns were statically loaded until fracture. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post hoc multiple comparison tests were used for statistical analyses. The groups showed significant differences in load-bearing capacity; empirical bidirectional FRC resin blocks had the highest capacity, while commercial ceramic blocks had the lowest capacity. Molar crowns formed from FRC resin blocks had higher load-bearing capacity compared to non-reinforced composite resin and ceramic blocks. These results show that fiber reinforcement increased the load-bearing capacity of molar crowns.
Subject(s)
Humans , Weight-Bearing , Computer-Aided Design , Composite Resins/chemistry , Crowns , Reference Values , Surface Properties , Materials Testing , Microscopy, Electron, Scanning , Ceramics/chemistry , Reproducibility of Results , Dental Prosthesis Design , Evaluation Study , MolarABSTRACT
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of various chelating solutions on the radicular push-out bond strength of calcium silicate-based and resin-based root canal sealers. Root canals of freshly-extracted single-rooted teeth (n = 80) were instrumented by using rotary instruments. The specimens were randomly divided into 4 groups according to the chelating solutions being tested: (1) 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); (2) 9% etidronic acid; (3) 1% peracetic acid (PAA); and (4) distilled water (control). In each group, the roots were further assigned into 2 subgroups according to the sealer used: (1) an epoxy resin-based sealer (AH Plus) and (2) a calcium silicate-based sealer (iRoot SP). Four 1 mm-thick sections were obtained from the coronal aspect of each root (n = 40 slices/group). Push-out bond strength test was performed at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min., and the bond strength data were analyzed statistically with two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni’s post hoc test (p < 0.05). Failure modes were assessed quantitatively under a stereomicroscope. Irrespective of the irrigation regimens, iRoot SP exhibited significantly higher push-out bond strength values than AH Plus (p < 0.05). For both the sealers, the use of chelating solutions increased the bond strength, but to levels that were not significantly greater than their respective controls (p > 0.05). iRoot SP showed higher resistance to dislocation than AH Plus. Final irrigation with 17% EDTA, 9% Etidronic acid, and 1% PAA did not improve the bond strength of AH Plus and iRoot SP to radicular dentin.
Subject(s)
Humans , Chelating Agents/chemistry , Dental Bonding/methods , Dental Pulp Cavity/drug effects , Dentin/drug effects , Root Canal Filling Materials/chemistry , Root Canal Irrigants/chemistry , Analysis of Variance , Dental Restoration Failure , Edetic Acid/chemistry , Etidronic Acid/chemistry , Materials Testing , Peracetic Acid/chemistry , Random Allocation , Reproducibility of Results , Surface Properties/drug effects , Time FactorsABSTRACT
Aims: To evaluate the effect of air-drying time of adhesives on shear bond strength of different adhesive systems. Methodology: The occlusal surfaces of 175 mandibular third molars were ground to obtain flat dentin surfaces and then divided into three groups according to three adhesive systems used: (1) Conventional three-step adhesive (Scotchbond Multi-purpose Plus); 2) Self-etch adhesive (Adper Easy Bond) and 3) Single bottle self-etch adhesive (Scotchbond Universal adhesive). Regarding the application of adhesives before resin composite application, it was gently air-dried for 3 s in Groups 1, whereas, the adhesive was left wet in Group 2. The group 3, that was air-dried until the liquid did not move (5 s), was served as control. Following bonding of resin cement (Filtek Supreme) to dentin, the specimens were light cured for 20s with a LED. After storage in water at 37ºC for one week, the strength measurements were accomplished with universal testing machine (Lloyd LRX) until the failure occurs. Failure modes were examined using a stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope. The data were analyzed with two-way analysis of variance Original Research Article British Journal of Medicine & Medical Research, 4(27): 4523-4532, 2014 4524 (ANOVA) and TukeyHSD tests (α=0.05). Results: The two-way ANOVA revealed that adhesive systems had a significant effect on shear bond strength values (p<0.001). However, air-drying time did not influence shear bond strength (p=0.442). Additionally, there was no interaction effect between adhesive systems and air-drying time (p=0.835). Conclusion: The data suggests that increased air-drying time of adhesives does not significantly affect bond strength.