Comparison of shear bond strengths with different bevel preparations for the reattachment of fractured fragments of maxillary central incisors

Abstract

Background/Aims: Fractures of anterior teeth are a highly prevalent form of dental trauma. Among the various treatment options, reattachment of the fractured part to the remaining tooth has a lot of advantages. The aim of this study was to compare different bevel preparation techniques when reattaching fractured fragments to maxillary central incisors. Methods: This study was performed on 52 maxillary central incisors that were randomly divided into 3 experimental groups and 1 control group. In the control group, the repair was done by attaching the fractured fragment using bonding and composite resin without any bevel preparation. In the second and third groups, the bevel preparation was done to a depth of 0.5 mm before attachment of the fragment on the palatal side of the fracture and on the labial and palatal sides, respectively. In the fourth group, after tooth preparation, a 0.5 mm composite veneer was placed on the labial surface. The amount of force needed to refracture the tooth was measured with a universal testing machine, and shear bond strength was calculated in MPa. Results: The mean and standard deviation (mean ± SD) of shear bond strengths in the control group were 81.48 ± 8.18 MPa. In the palatal bevel group, they were 97.74 ± 11.41 MPa; in the labial and palatal bevel group, 131.56 ± 9.25 MPa; and in the composite veneer group, 104.36 ± 5.50 MPa. Significant differences were observed between the groups, but there was no significant difference between the palatal bevel and composite veneer groups. Conclusions: Reattachment of the fractured fragments by all three methods increased the shear bond strength. The highest shear bond strength was obtained when both labial and palatal bevels were used.

Reattachment of Fractured Tooth Fragment by Multidisciplinary Treatment Approach

“…Several studies indicate that this procedure increases the resistance of the union to shear, which can possibly occur due to the oblique forces generated 14,31,45) . On the other hand, from an esthetic point of view, camouflaging the fracture line with a nano-hybrid composite resin will successfully restore the natural and cosmetic appearance of the fractured tooth 17,31) . Some studies have shown that using fiber posts obviates the need for any additional fragment preparation such as groves or bevels, as the post will provide sufficient strength to resist fracture 18) .…”

Comparing fracture resistance on bovine incisors restored by tooth fragment reattachment versus direct composite restoration techniques

“…Nevertheless, this methodology is well documented in similar studies. 1,7,8 It is important to note that each of the two restoration techniques compared in this study has associated advantages and disadvantages. As long as the fragment is intact, reattachment is often preferred in dental practice and TRF is often considered to be the method of choice as the fragment provides the ideal reconstruction of morphology and texture.…”

“…Traumatic dental injuries (TDI) usually occur in childhood and adolescence. 1 Crown fractures comprise 26%-76% of dental injuries in the permanent dentition. The most common etiologic factors are injuries caused by falls, contact sports, automobile accidents, or foreign bodies striking the teeth.…”

“…While each modality has its advantages, none are optimal and all may require compromises in esthetic appearance, tissue preservation, etc. 1,8 According to the International Association of Dental Traumatology guidelines, if the tooth fragment is available and intact, it can be bonded back on to the tooth. 9 TFR offers several advantages in that it represents an extremely conservative procedure with the ability to restore tooth esthetics with the same shape, color, translucency, and texture of the original tooth.…”

“…Traumatic dental injuries (TDI) usually occur in childhood and adolescence 1 . Crown fractures comprise 26%–76% of dental injuries in the permanent dentition.…”