Abstract
Uncomplicated crown fractures are the most common form of traumatic dental injuries (TDIs) in children affecting their personal and social well-being.AimTo evaluate the fracture resistance of fractured incisors restored with particulate filler composites, glass fiber-reinforced composites, and Polyethylene fiber-reinforced composite restorations.Materials and methodsStandardized incisal and mesio-incisal fractures with chamfer preparation were prepared on human maxillary central incisors. Test samples were restored using particulate filler composites (Filtek Z 250), glass fiber-reinforced composites (Fiber-Splint) and polyethylene-reinforced composites (Ribbond). Static load was applied to the test samples using Universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min. Data were tabulated and analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) (p = 0.05).ResultsDescriptive statistics of mean [standard deviation (SD)] peak failure load in incisal restorations for particular filler composite, glass fiber-reinforced composites, and polyethylene fiber-reinforced composites were 196.00 (± 67.46), 186.28 (± 66.44), and 246.71 (± 24.52) respectively, whereas for mesio-incisal restorations, mean (SD) peak failure loads were 169.28 (± 33.53), 218.57 (± 74.41), and 225.71 (± 57.52) respectively.ConclusionPolyethylene-reinforced composites showed an improved load-bearing capacity in incisal and mesio-incisal restorations when compared with particulate filler composites and glass fiber-reinforced composites.How to cite this article: Patnana AK, Rao VVN, Chandrabhatla SK, Rajasekhar VR. Comparative Evaluation of the Fracture Resistance of Two Different Fiber-reinforced Composite Restorations with Particulate Filler Composite Restorations. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2018;11(4):277-282.
Highlights
Anterior crown fractures are a common form of traumatic dental injuries (TDIs) in children and adolescents.[1]
Polyethylene-reinforced composites showed an improved load-bearing capacity in incisal and mesio-incisal restorations when compared with particulate filler composites and glass fiber-reinforced composites
The mean fracture resistance and standard deviation (SD) of incisal and mesioincisal restoration groups are shown in Tables 3 and 4
Summary
Anterior crown fractures are a common form of TDIs in children and adolescents.[1]. It is hypothesized that the incidence of TDI in the future might exceed the incidence of dental caries and periodontal diseases.[2]. A large number of techniques have been employed for restoration of uncomplicated crown fractures which include stainless steel crowns, orthodontic bands, resin held by pins,[4] and porcelain crowns.[5] the compromised esthetic outcomes and substantial sacrifice of the tooth structure limit their use in anterior restorations.[6] Reattachment of the fractured segment is proposed to be a valid alternative for anterior restorations. Though this technique is esthetically acceptable, debonding or refracture of restored segment to the new trauma is the main drawback.[7,8]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
