Fracture Strength of Severely Damaged Primary Anterior Teeth after Restoration with Composite Resin and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement

Abstract

Background and Aim: Restoration of primary anterior teeth with severe caries extending to the gingival margin is challenging for many clinicians especially in uncooperative children. Resin modified glass ionomer cements (RMGICs) can be suitable for use in such cases since they require fewer application steps than composite resins. This study aimed to assess the fracture strength of severely damaged primary anterior teeth after their coronal build-up using RMGIC and composite resin. Materials and Methods: This in vitro, experimental study was conducted on 40 primary teeth that met our inclusion criteria. After decoronization, they were cleaned and root canals were filled. In the coronal cavity, one layer of base was applied and an undercut was created in the canal wall above the base. The teeth were divided into two groups of 20 for coronal restoration. In group 1, etching, bonding, intracanal post fabrication and restoration with composite resin were carried out. In group 2, conditioning, intracanal post fabrication and restoration with Fuji II LC RMGIC were performed. After thermal cycles, fracture strength of teeth was measured and compared in the two groups using t-test. Results: Fracture strength of teeth was not significantly different between two groups restored with composite resin (5.03±2.30 MPa) and RMGIC (5.67±2.38 MPa) (P>0.05) Conclusion: In the post and crown build up of severely damaged primary anterior teeth with severe caries extending to the gingival margin, Fuji II LC RMGIC can be used as an alternative to composite resin especially in uncooperative children or treatment under general anesthesia.

Fracture Resistance of a Bulk-Fill and a Conventional Composite and a Combination of Both for Coronal Restoration of Severely Damaged Primary Anterior Teeth

“…Evidence shows that packing the composite into the canal and creating a short composite post is among the simplest and most-effective methods suggested for restoration of severely damaged primary anterior teeth [27]. Thus, we packed the composite into the canal for coronal restoration of teeth in our study.…”

“…They stated that use of intracanal post is imperative for composite restoration of severely damaged teeth when the remaining tooth structure is not sufficient to provide adequate retention. Paryab et al [27] compared the fracture strength of composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement for coronal restoration of severely damaged primary anterior teeth (intracanal post and coronal build-up) and found no significant difference between the two groups. However, the fracture strength of conventional composite in our study was higher than the reported value in their study (14.5 MPa versus 5.03 MPa).…”

“…Some others considered the fractures in the coronal third of the root to be repairable [53]. However, since the crown lengthening surgery is not routinely performed for pediatric dental patients, we considered fractures above the CEJ to be repairable according to Seraj et al, [30], Paryab et al, [27] and Atalay et al [33]. The frequency of repairable mode of failure was 80% for the conventional, 73.6% for the bulk-fill and 80% for the bulk-fill plus conventional group, with no significant difference.…”

“…Many studies have evaluated the properties of an optimal intracanal post for anterior primary teeth [9,25, 26]. Evidence shows that packing the composite into the canal and creating a short composite post is among the simplest and most-effective methods suggested for restoration of severely damaged primary anterior teeth [27]. Composite posts have a modulus of elasticity similar to that of intracanal dentin and bond to tooth structure.…”

Relative share, frequency and correlation of restorations in both dental dentitions in childhood

“…Compomers may be a choice instead of other restorative materials for primary dentition for class I and II cavities [12], [13]. Class III cavities or aproximal restorations of primary incisors are often prepared with a labial or lingual access, to include a bigger surface for better adhesion and improving the longevity of the restorations [14]. Cavities and fillings in the cervix region from class V of primary incisors are similar to the ones in permanent dentition [3].…”