Original Articles
Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of simulated human immature teeth reinforced with anatomic post and MTA or Biodentine as apical barrier | |
Kirti Mangalam, Khushbu, Shaily Sharma, Priyanka Verma, Hamdan | |
Background: The present study was conducted to compare the resistance to fracture of simulated human immature teeth treated with anatomic post and MTA or biodentine as apical barrier. Materials & Methods: The present study was conducted on 40 permanent mandibular incisors. The 40 teeth were then randomly divided into two groups (n = 20) according to the apical barrier used for apexification. All samples were incubated for two weeks at 37°C before subjecting to fracture testing using the Universal Testing Machine. A compressive load was applied at 135° to the long axis of the tooth. Results: Group I—apical barrier using biodentine and Group II—apical barrier using MTA (MTA Plus). Each group was further divided into four subgroups: Group I (n = 20), subgroup A (n = 5)—apical barrier using Biodentine with no obturation, subgroup B (n = 5)-apical barrier using biodentine, subgroup C (n= 5) apical barrier using biodentine and the same biodentine as complete obturation material. Subgroup D (n = 5)—apical barrier using biodentine with prefabricated glass fiber post as reinforcement. Group II (n = 20) The subgroups (n = 5 each) were same as Group I, but Biodentine was replaced by MTA as apical barrier as well as canal reinforcement material (subgroups IIA, IIB, IIC, IID). Fracture resistance in group I was maximum as compared to group II. Everstick showed value of 1472.3 MPa in group I and 1294.5 MPa in group II. Control showed 642.4 in group I and 610.5 MPa in group II. Inter- group comparison was significant (P< 0.05). Conclusion: Authors found that everStick post is a viable option for reinforcement of teeth with immature root apex. Key words: Bio dentine, EverStick post, Root apex. |
|
Html View | Download PDF | Current Issue |