RESUMO
Introduction: The best treatment for the deeply carious tooth that cannot be restored is by the root canal therapy. This method has saved many patients from the loss of tooth. The common practice is either to deliver a full crown or close the access cavity with restoration. Hence in this study, the clinical longevity of the routine practice is tested for by analyzing the fracture toughness and the survival of the teeth that were restored endodontically with various materials. Materials and Methods: The hospital records were retrospectively evaluated from 2000 to 2010 for a decade. The demographics as well as the survival and the failure rates noted and compared for the various types of the restorations. The number of the walls of the teeth was also compared. Results: Thousand teeth were considered in the study. Less than 7% of teeth had coronal fractures. Of the 93% teeth that had survived, the most common restoration was Individual post (+ crown) followed by GIC, amalgams, and crowns. The mean survival of the crown+ bridge & gold restoration was highest. The mean survival was 10 ± 2 years for the restored teeth without any fractures at the coronal level. The failure was greatest for the GIC followed by amalgam, and the variations when compared with other restorations were significant. There was no significant difference for the number of the walls on the crown; however, the number of walls present was proportional to the survival rate. Conclusion: The teeth that were covered with a crown were comparatively fracture resistant and had a better survival rate compared to other restorations. GIC showed highest fracture, and the post core with crown had the best survival. Restoration of the lost crown architecture and the reinforcement are the best methods that can be followed for the survivals.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: This randomized clinical trial tested the effect of three different desensitizing agents on reduction of pain due to hypersensitive cervical dentin lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight individuals with 84 teeth diagnosed with cervical dentin hypersensitivity (DH) in at least one tooth in any three of the four quadrants were selected. Patients exhibiting pain scores of two or more on the visual analog scale (VAS) were included in the study. Each quadrant in an individual was randomly assigned to one of the three treatment groups based on computer-generated random number. The desensitizing agents used were Profluorid Varnish (Voco: Cuxhaven Germany), Admira Protect (Voco: Cuxhaven Germany), and PRG-Barrier Coat (Shofu: japan). One operator recorded the baseline sensitivity scores after evaporative and tactile stimuli by visual analog score system. The second operator who was not aware of the baseline values applied the desensitizing agents and recorded the sensitivity scores. VAS scores for both the stimuli were noted immediately after application, 1 week, and after 1 month. The data were analyzed using repeated measure ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's multiple comparison tests (P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant). RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in VAS scores from baseline in all the three groups at all the time intervals (P < 0.001). Admira Protect showed significant reduction of hypersensitivity scores at 1 month compared to other groups (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Admira Protect was proved to be better in reducing pain due to DH than PRG-Barrier Coat and Profluorid Varnish after 1 month of application.
