Glass Fiber Reinforced Composite Resin as an Intracanal Post –A Clinical Study

Abstract

Restoration of primary incisors, which have been severely damaged by early childhood caries or trauma, is a difficult task for the pediatric dentist. With the introduction of new adhesive systems and restorative materials,alternative approaches for treating these teeth have been proposed. Materials: Ten healthy children aged between 3-4 years who had 28 grossly destructed primary maxillary incisors requiring intra canal retention were selected for the study. Following root canal treatment, either a Glass Fiber Reinforced Composite Resin (GFRCR everStick,, Finland) or an omega shaped stainless steel wire were placed as intracanal posts in these teeth. Flowable composite was used for cementation of posts and also to build up the coronal structure using celluloid strip crowns. Both types of intracanal posts were evaluated for retention and marginal adaptation at 1, 6 and 12 months. The data obtained was subjected to statistical analysis. Conclusion:GFRCR intracanal posts showed better retention and marginal adaptation than omega shaped stainless steel wire posts.

Fiber Reinforced Composite Space Maintainers: Methods of Clinical Application: Case Report

“…Fracture of the fiber frame at 3 months was reported as other reasons for failure of FRC space maintainers, in contrast to previous reports 14,16,17 The possible reasons for fiber frame fractures were described as chewing patterns, supraeruption and impingement of opposite tooth on the fiber frame.…”

“…The observation time of the problem was reported as early as 3 months and the possible reasons were described as mechanical stresses, prismless enamel surface of primary teeth and inadequate isolation. 16,17 The clinical success rates were presented as 27% (6 months), 43% and 53% (1 year) in similar studies. 14,16,17 Kirzioglu and Erturk and Saravanakumar et al recommended to use splint-it space maintainers only for short periods, Kargul 19 We observed failures due to debonding at the enamel-composite interface within 6 months in both type of maintainers, but the problems were solved by rebonding and repairing.…”

“…16,17 The clinical success rates were presented as 27% (6 months), 43% and 53% (1 year) in similar studies. 14,16,17 Kirzioglu and Erturk and Saravanakumar et al recommended to use splint-it space maintainers only for short periods, Kargul 19 We observed failures due to debonding at the enamel-composite interface within 6 months in both type of maintainers, but the problems were solved by rebonding and repairing. After 6 months, severe damage was detected and according to the patients' ages traditional band and loop space maintainers were applied.…”

“…Design and construction of space maintainers with FRCs were presented by various researchers, but the reports about clinical success are unsufficient. [13][14][15][16][17] Gajanan et al reported that ribbond space maintainer as well as repaired ribbond space maintainer are comparable to the conventional band and loop in terms of physical strength. 18 Yeluri and Munshi presented the semi-fixed type FRC space maintainer and concluded that they have advantages over the traditional band and loop space maintainers.…”

Light-Curing Distance and Resin Thickness Effects on the Shortfiber–reinforced Resin Composites’ Depth of Cure

“…One of the advancements related to resin composites is the fiber-reinforced resin composite that is more widely used nowadays [3][4][5][6]. Recently, a short fiber-reinforced resin composite (SFRC) was introduced for use in restorative dentistry.…”