This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of different bonding materials used in fragment reattachment for uncomplicated crown fractures, compared to direct composite resin restoration. Sixty human maxillary incisors were divided into five groups (n = 12): G1, control; G2, direct composite resin; G3, flowable composite; G4, preheated composite; G5, self-adhesive resin cement. After simulated fractures and thermocycling, fracture resistance was tested using a universal machine. Data were analysed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). G1 showed the highest resistance (75.7 ± 10.5 MPa); G2 the lowest (44.7 ± 7.9 MPa). G4 and G5 showed significantly higher resistance than G2 (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found amongst G3–G5 (p > 0.05). Preheated composite and self-adhesive resin cement demonstrated improved fracture resistance compared to direct composite resin. Appropriate material selection may enhance the long-term performance of fragment reattachment in uncomplicated crown fractures.
{"title":"Reattachment or Restoration? Fracture Resistance of Uncomplicated Crown Fractures Using Various Intermediate Materials","authors":"Soner Sismanoglu, Vasfiye Isik","doi":"10.1111/aej.70001","DOIUrl":"10.1111/aej.70001","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of different bonding materials used in fragment reattachment for uncomplicated crown fractures, compared to direct composite resin restoration. Sixty human maxillary incisors were divided into five groups (<i>n</i> = 12): G1, control; G2, direct composite resin; G3, flowable composite; G4, preheated composite; G5, self-adhesive resin cement. After simulated fractures and thermocycling, fracture resistance was tested using a universal machine. Data were analysed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0.05). G1 showed the highest resistance (75.7 ± 10.5 MPa); G2 the lowest (44.7 ± 7.9 MPa). G4 and G5 showed significantly higher resistance than G2 (<i>p</i> < 0.001). No significant difference was found amongst G3–G5 (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Preheated composite and self-adhesive resin cement demonstrated improved fracture resistance compared to direct composite resin. Appropriate material selection may enhance the long-term performance of fragment reattachment in uncomplicated crown fractures.</p>","PeriodicalId":55581,"journal":{"name":"Australian Endodontic Journal","volume":"51 3","pages":"691-698"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aej.70001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144790796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Elisa Korte Fortes Gollo, Fábio de Almeida Gomes, Katerine Jahnecke Pilownic, Daiana Elisabeth Böttcher, Carolina Clasen Vieira, Fernanda Geraldo Pappen
This retrospective study assessed the fracture incidence of Reciproc R25 and X1 Blue 25.06 files after up to three uses in 1720 root canals (1620 teeth) treated by a specialist. A standardised protocol was followed for all procedures. Periapical radiographs with the fractured instrument were used to evaluate the fragment's location and size and to determine the root curvature's angle. Data included fracture site (apical, middle, coronal) and management (removal, bypass or retention). Files were inspected post-use; non-deformed ones were sterilised and reused. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed using STATA 14. Among 1317 canals treated with R25 and 403 with X1 Blue, six fractures occurred: four R25 (0.3%) and two X1 Blue (0.5%). Four fractures were in molars, all in the apical third. Two fragments were bypassed, one removed, and three retained. Results indicate low fracture rates for both file systems, even with repeated use in primary treatments.
本回顾性研究评估了Reciproc R25和X1 Blue 25.06锉在专家治疗的1720个根管(1620颗牙齿)中使用三次后的骨折发生率。所有程序都遵循标准化的规程。使用骨折器械进行根尖周围x线片评估碎片的位置和大小,并确定根曲率的角度。数据包括骨折部位(根尖、中间、冠状)和处理(切除、搭桥或保留)。使用后检查文件;未变形的被消毒并重复使用。采用STATA 14进行描述性统计分析。R25治疗1317根管,X1 Blue治疗403根管,共发生6例骨折,其中R25 4例(0.3%),X1 Blue 2例(0.5%)。臼齿有4处骨折,均在牙尖三分之一处。两个碎片被绕过,一个被移除,三个被保留。结果表明,即使在初级治疗中反复使用,两种文件系统的骨折率也很低。
{"title":"Fracture Risk of Endodontic Files: Clinical Analysis of Reciproc and X1 Blue After Multiple Uses","authors":"Elisa Korte Fortes Gollo, Fábio de Almeida Gomes, Katerine Jahnecke Pilownic, Daiana Elisabeth Böttcher, Carolina Clasen Vieira, Fernanda Geraldo Pappen","doi":"10.1111/aej.70003","DOIUrl":"10.1111/aej.70003","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This retrospective study assessed the fracture incidence of Reciproc R25 and X1 Blue 25.06 files after up to three uses in 1720 root canals (1620 teeth) treated by a specialist. A standardised protocol was followed for all procedures. Periapical radiographs with the fractured instrument were used to evaluate the fragment's location and size and to determine the root curvature's angle. Data included fracture site (apical, middle, coronal) and management (removal, bypass or retention). Files were inspected post-use; non-deformed ones were sterilised and reused. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed using STATA 14. Among 1317 canals treated with R25 and 403 with X1 Blue, six fractures occurred: four R25 (0.3%) and two X1 Blue (0.5%). Four fractures were in molars, all in the apical third. Two fragments were bypassed, one removed, and three retained. Results indicate low fracture rates for both file systems, even with repeated use in primary treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":55581,"journal":{"name":"Australian Endodontic Journal","volume":"51 3","pages":"699-705"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aej.70003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144790795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}