外伤后牙齿碎片的粘附:粘附策略和保存在救援箱中的影响。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-03 DOI:10.22514/jocpd.2024.030
Asli Kaya, Blend Hamza, Nadin Al-Haj Husain, Kiren J Mätzener, Mutlu Özcan
{"title":"外伤后牙齿碎片的粘附:粘附策略和保存在救援箱中的影响。","authors":"Asli Kaya, Blend Hamza, Nadin Al-Haj Husain, Kiren J Mätzener, Mutlu Özcan","doi":"10.22514/jocpd.2024.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aims to investigate the impact of storage conditions for crown fragments (specifically, whether they were stored within a tooth rescue box or in tap water) on their adhesion to fractured teeth when subjected to two different adhesive systems (namely, total etch and self etch). Sixty maxillary premolars were sectioned to obtain tooth fragments. These fragments were stored briefly (2 hours) and reattached in the following groups: Group 1 (fragments stored in tooth rescue box and reattached with etch and rinse (E&R) technique), Group 2 (fragments stored in tap water and reattached with E&R technique), Group 3 (fragments stored in tooth rescue box and reattached with self-etch (SE) technique), and Group 4 (fragments stored in tap water and reattached SE technique). After reattachment, the bonded tooth fragments underwent thermal cycling (500 cycles, 5-55 °C) and bond strength testing using a universal testing machine. Two-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's tests were used for bond strength comparison (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05). A two-parameter Weibull distribution was conducted to evaluate the reliability of the storage medium and adhesion modality on bond strength. The results showed that measured shear bond values (MPa ± Standard deviation (SD); arranged in descending order) for each group were: Group 2 (Tap water/E&R = 6.5 ± 2.1), Group 1 (Rescue box/E&R = 6.0 ± 2.5), Group 4 (Tap water/E&R = 5.1 ± 2.8), and Group 3 (Rescue box/SE = 3.6 ± 3.2). Significant differences were found only between Groups 2 and 3 (<i>p</i> = 0.002). In conclusion, storing crown fragments in a tooth rescue box did not significantly affect the shear bond strength of the restored tooth. However, fragments reattached using the self-etch technique showed comparable shear bond strength but a higher rate of adhesive failures compared to the E&R technique.</p>","PeriodicalId":50235,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry","volume":"48 2","pages":"19-25"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adhesion of tooth fragment after trauma: effect of adhesion strategy and storage in the rescue box.\",\"authors\":\"Asli Kaya, Blend Hamza, Nadin Al-Haj Husain, Kiren J Mätzener, Mutlu Özcan\",\"doi\":\"10.22514/jocpd.2024.030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aims to investigate the impact of storage conditions for crown fragments (specifically, whether they were stored within a tooth rescue box or in tap water) on their adhesion to fractured teeth when subjected to two different adhesive systems (namely, total etch and self etch). Sixty maxillary premolars were sectioned to obtain tooth fragments. These fragments were stored briefly (2 hours) and reattached in the following groups: Group 1 (fragments stored in tooth rescue box and reattached with etch and rinse (E&R) technique), Group 2 (fragments stored in tap water and reattached with E&R technique), Group 3 (fragments stored in tooth rescue box and reattached with self-etch (SE) technique), and Group 4 (fragments stored in tap water and reattached SE technique). After reattachment, the bonded tooth fragments underwent thermal cycling (500 cycles, 5-55 °C) and bond strength testing using a universal testing machine. Two-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's tests were used for bond strength comparison (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05). A two-parameter Weibull distribution was conducted to evaluate the reliability of the storage medium and adhesion modality on bond strength. The results showed that measured shear bond values (MPa ± Standard deviation (SD); arranged in descending order) for each group were: Group 2 (Tap water/E&R = 6.5 ± 2.1), Group 1 (Rescue box/E&R = 6.0 ± 2.5), Group 4 (Tap water/E&R = 5.1 ± 2.8), and Group 3 (Rescue box/SE = 3.6 ± 3.2). Significant differences were found only between Groups 2 and 3 (<i>p</i> = 0.002). In conclusion, storing crown fragments in a tooth rescue box did not significantly affect the shear bond strength of the restored tooth. However, fragments reattached using the self-etch technique showed comparable shear bond strength but a higher rate of adhesive failures compared to the E&R technique.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50235,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"48 2\",\"pages\":\"19-25\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22514/jocpd.2024.030\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22514/jocpd.2024.030","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在探讨牙冠残片在两种不同粘接系统(即全蚀和自蚀)的作用下,其存放条件(特别是存放在救齿盒中还是自来水中)对其与断裂牙齿粘接性的影响。对 60 颗上颌前臼齿进行切片,以获得牙齿碎片。将这些牙片短暂保存(2 小时)后按以下组别重新粘接:第 1 组(保存在救护盒中,使用蚀刻和冲洗(E&R)技术重新粘接)、第 2 组(保存在自来水中,使用蚀刻和冲洗技术重新粘接)、第 3 组(保存在救护盒中,使用自酸蚀(SE)技术重新粘接)和第 4 组(保存在自来水中,使用自酸蚀技术重新粘接)。重新粘接后,粘接后的牙片进行热循环(500 个循环,5-55 °C),并使用万能试验机进行粘接强度测试。粘接强度比较采用了双向方差分析(ANOVA)和 Tukey 检验(p ≤ 0.05)。采用双参数 Weibull 分布来评估储存介质和粘合方式对粘合强度的影响。结果显示,各组的剪切粘接强度测量值(兆帕±标准偏差(SD);按降序排列)分别为第 2 组(自来水/E&R = 6.5 ± 2.1)、第 1 组(救援箱/E&R = 6.0 ± 2.5)、第 4 组(自来水/E&R = 5.1 ± 2.8)和第 3 组(救援箱/SE = 3.6 ± 3.2)。只有第 2 组和第 3 组之间存在显著差异(p = 0.002)。总之,将牙冠残片存放在牙科救援箱中不会对修复后牙齿的剪切粘接强度产生显著影响。不过,与 E&R 技术相比,使用自酸蚀技术重新粘接的残片显示出相当的剪切粘接强度,但粘接失败率较高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Adhesion of tooth fragment after trauma: effect of adhesion strategy and storage in the rescue box.

This study aims to investigate the impact of storage conditions for crown fragments (specifically, whether they were stored within a tooth rescue box or in tap water) on their adhesion to fractured teeth when subjected to two different adhesive systems (namely, total etch and self etch). Sixty maxillary premolars were sectioned to obtain tooth fragments. These fragments were stored briefly (2 hours) and reattached in the following groups: Group 1 (fragments stored in tooth rescue box and reattached with etch and rinse (E&R) technique), Group 2 (fragments stored in tap water and reattached with E&R technique), Group 3 (fragments stored in tooth rescue box and reattached with self-etch (SE) technique), and Group 4 (fragments stored in tap water and reattached SE technique). After reattachment, the bonded tooth fragments underwent thermal cycling (500 cycles, 5-55 °C) and bond strength testing using a universal testing machine. Two-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's tests were used for bond strength comparison (p ≤ 0.05). A two-parameter Weibull distribution was conducted to evaluate the reliability of the storage medium and adhesion modality on bond strength. The results showed that measured shear bond values (MPa ± Standard deviation (SD); arranged in descending order) for each group were: Group 2 (Tap water/E&R = 6.5 ± 2.1), Group 1 (Rescue box/E&R = 6.0 ± 2.5), Group 4 (Tap water/E&R = 5.1 ± 2.8), and Group 3 (Rescue box/SE = 3.6 ± 3.2). Significant differences were found only between Groups 2 and 3 (p = 0.002). In conclusion, storing crown fragments in a tooth rescue box did not significantly affect the shear bond strength of the restored tooth. However, fragments reattached using the self-etch technique showed comparable shear bond strength but a higher rate of adhesive failures compared to the E&R technique.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry
Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-PEDIATRICS
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: The purpose of The Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry is to provide clinically relevant information to enable the practicing dentist to have access to the state of the art in pediatric dentistry. From prevention, to information, to the management of different problems encountered in children''s related medical and dental problems, this peer-reviewed journal keeps you abreast of the latest news and developments related to pediatric dentistry.
期刊最新文献
A comparative study of stress amongst different hierarchies of paediatric dental providers. Clinical effectiveness and parental acceptance of silver diamine fluoride in preschool children: a non-randomized trial. Clinical indications for the diagnosis and treatment of functional posterior crossbite in pediatric population: a narrative review with clinical description. Co-Mask R-CNN: collaborative learning-based method for tooth instance segmentation. Criteria for early diagnosis of congenitally missing second premolars based on the calcification grades of other permanent posterior teeth: a retrospective study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1