Effect of dehydration and rehydration intervals on fracture resistance of reattached tooth fragments using a multimode adhesive

Poubel, Déborah Lousan do Nascimento; Almeida, Juliana Franco; Ribeiro, Ana Paula Dias; Maia, Guilherme Brasil; Martínez, Jesús Mauricio González; Garcia, Fernanda Cristina Pimentel

doi:10.1111/edt.12344

Cited by 31 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, bovine teeth were selected for the present study. Tooth standardization and uniformity of fracture procedures were based upon a previous study done by Poubel et al . This was done to reduce bias related to fragment anatomy and surface characteristics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was done to reduce bias related to fragment anatomy and surface characteristics. The drying period of the fragments was kept at 24 hours in fragment reattachment groups (II, III, IV), and teeth were kept in artificial saliva prior to experimentation …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Immersion in distilled water for 30 minutes has been recommended by Capp et al., while Shirani et al recommended 24 hours. Poubel et al found that there was no difference in bond strength in immersion‐rehydration protocols lasting longer than 15 minutes. In recent guidelines, however, the IADT does not specify rehydration recommendations and protocols …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance using two rehydration protocols for fragment reattachment in uncomplicated crown fractures

Aripirala

Tewari

Mathur

et al. 2019

Dental Traumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims Uncomplicated crown fracture is the most common traumatic dental injury. The International Association of Dental Traumatology has recommended fragment reattachment as the best method for restoring uncomplicated crown fractures of permanent teeth. Dehydration can affect fracture resistance after reattachment. However, a standard protocol for rehydration is still lacking. Hence, the aim of this study was to design a humidification chamber and assess its efficacy for improving the rehydration of tooth fragments and increasing fracture resistance after reattachment. Materials and Methods Sixty mandibular bovine incisors with similar dimensions and free of any structural deformities were fractured and randomized into five groups: Group I, Control Group (sound teeth); Group II (dehydrated for 24 hours); Group III (rehydrated in distilled water for 15 minutes); Group IV (rehydrated in a humidification chamber for 15 minutes); and Group V (restored with composite). A humidification chamber was designed and used for rehydration for 15 minutes in Group IV. Fragments in Group III were immersed in distilled water for 15 minutes. Reattachment procedures and materials remained the same in all groups. Fracture resistance was tested in a universal testing machine, and statistical analysis was done by Stata‐14. Results The Control Group with sound teeth (Group I) exhibited a maximum value of 282 ± 10.32 N, while Group II (fragment reattached without rehydration) had the least fracture resistance, 49.75 ± 5.2 N. Rehydration by means of the humidification chamber protocol (Group IV) resulted in significantly higher fracture resistance (150.54 ± 6.49 N) than in Group III (rehydration by means of immersion). Conclusions Fracture resistance after fragment reattachment was significantly affected by the rehydration of fragments for 15 minutes in the humidification chamber. Fragment reattachment after rehydration showed better fracture resistance than the composite restorations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance using two rehydration protocols for fragment reattachment in uncomplicated crown fractures

Aripirala

Tewari

Mathur

et al. 2019

Dental Traumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast with the results found by Capp et al, Shirani et al considered rehydration for 30 min unsatisfactory in comparison with 24 hour, a period of time that could be considered satisfactory if the fragment was reattached a second time. In an in vitro study with bovine teeth, Poubel et al reported that the fracture strength of a tooth, whose reattachment was performed with a dehydrated fragment, is inferior to that of a tooth kept hydrated or rehydrated for 15 minute or 24 hour. As there was no statistical difference between both periods, rehydration for only 15 minute would be preferred, thus not only favoring clinical management, but also partially restoring lost resistance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several factors may influence DT management and the consequent prognosis—such as the affected dental tissue and the amount lost, the type of fracture, the need to perform endodontic treatment, the presence or absence of dental fragments, and the adaptation of a possible fragment to the tooth remnant . Although there is no consensus in the literature about the ideal technique for dental fragment bonding with different fracture patterns, the chosen treatment should provide the affected tooth with fracture resistance results similar to those of the healthy tooth …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%