Fracture Resistance of Maxillary Primary Anterior Restorations Using Grandio and Grandio Flow Composites with Two Differ-ent Types of Posts: An In Vitro Study

Fallahinejad Ghajari, Masoud; Majidi Rad, Hoda; Baghalian, Ali

doi:10.30699/jidai.31.3.139

[Home ] [Archive]

Main Menu

Journal Information

Editorial Policies

Articles archive

For Authors

Contact us

Site Facilities

Search in website

Receive site information

Last site contents
:: Contact Us

Volume 31, Issue 3 (7-2019)

J Iran Dent Assoc 2019, 31(3): 139-145

Back to browse issues page

Fracture Resistance of Maxillary Primary Anterior Restorations Using Grandio and Grandio Flow Composites with Two Differ-ent Types of Posts: An In Vitro Study

Masoud Fallahinejad Ghajari¹

, Hoda Majidi Rad²

, Ali Baghalian ^*

1- Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dental Research Center, Research Institute of Dental Sciences, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Dentist, Private Practice, Tehran, Iran
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , alibaghalian@gmail.com

Abstract: (3122 Views)

Background and Aim: There have been attempts to restore destroyed primary anterior teeth using a variety of post and core systems, which were able to solve just part of the problems related to this issue. Therefore, the present study aimed to inves-tigate the fracture resistance of restorations supported with a variety of posts and cores in primary anterior teeth.
Materials and Methods: The present study was an in vitro experimental study on 40 extracted maxillary primary canine teeth. The teeth were divided into four groups: (I) Grandio Flow composite core and fiberglass post, (II) Grandio Flow composite core and Grandio Flow composite post, (III) Grandio composite core and fiberglass post and (IV) Grandio composite core and Grandio composite post. Then, the fracture re-sistance was compared among the four groups. One-way ANOVA was used to analyze the data.
Results: The mean fracture resistance was 398.2±135.2 in group 1, 474.7±100.8 in group 2, 374.3±161.1 in group 3 and 364.4±74.5 in group 4; these differences were not statistically significant (P=0.182).
Conclusion: The results of this study showed that the highest fracture resistance was observed in the Grandio Flow composite core and Grandio Flow composite post. Grandio composite core and Grandio composite post showed the lowest fracture resistance; but there were no statistically significant differences among the groups.

Keywords: Post and Core Technique, Composite Resins, Tooth, Deciduous

Full-Text [PDF 589 kb] (1223 Downloads)

Type of Study: Original | Subject: Pediatric Dentistry

References

1. Wanderley MT, Ferreira SL, Rodrigues CR, Ro-drigues Filho LE. Primary anterior tooth restoration using posts with macroretentive el-ements. Quintessence Int. 1999 Jun;30(6):432-6.

2. Pinheiro SL, Bonecker MJ, Duarte DA, Imparato JC, Oda M. Bond strength analysis of intracanal posts used in anterior primary teeth: an in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2006 Fall; 31(1):32-4.

3. Woo D, Sheller B, Williams B, Mancl L, Grembowski D. Dentists' and parents' perceptions of health, esthetics, and treatment of maxillary primary incisors. Pediatr Dent. 2005 Jan-Feb;27(1):19-23.

4. Ramires-Romito A, Wanderley MT, Oliveira M, Imparato J, Correa M. Biologic restoration of primary anterior teeth. Quintessence Int. 2000 Jun;31(6):405-11.

5. Policy on Early Childhood Caries (ECC): Classifications, Consequences, and Preventive Strategies. Pediatr Dent. 2016 Oct;38(6):52-54.

6. Baker LH, Moon P, Mourino AP. Retention of esthetic veneers on primary stainless steel crowns. ASDC J Dent Child. 1996 May-Jun; 63 (3):185-9.

7. Foster T, Perinpanayagam H, Pfaffenbach A, Certo M. Recurrence of early childhood caries after comprehensive treatment with general anesthesia and follow-up. J Dent Child (Chic). 2006 Jan-Apr;73(1):25-30.

8. Bussadori S, Pereira R, Guedes-Pinto A. Human enamel veneer restoration in a decidu-ous tooth: clinical case. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2003 Winter;27(2):111-5.

9. Croll TP. Primary incisor restoration using resin-veneered stainless steel crowns. ASDC J Dent Child. 1998 Mar-Apr;65(2):89-95.

10. Hosoya Y, Omachi K, Staninec M. Colorimetric values of esthetic stainless steel crowns. Quintessence Int. 2002 Jul-Aug; 33(7):537-41.

11. Viera C, Ribeiro C. Polyethylene fiber tape used as a post and core in decayed primary anterior teeth: a treatment option. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2001 Fall;26(1):1-4.

12. Mortada A, King NM. A simplified technique for the restoration of severely mutilated primary anterior teeth. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2004 Spring;28(3):187-92.

13. Pithan S, Vieira Rde S, Chain MC. Tensile bond strength of intracanal posts in primary anterior teeth: an in vitro study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2002 Fall;27(1):35-9.

14. Baghalian A, Ranjpour M, Hooshmand T, Her-man NG, Ebrahimi A. Comparison of fracture resistance in post restorations in primary maxillary incisors. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2014 Sep;15(3):313-6.

15. Memarpour M, Shafiei F, Abbaszadeh M. Retentive strength of different intracanal posts in restorations of anterior primary teeth: an in vitro study. Restor Dent Endod. 2013 Nov; 38 (4):215-21.

16. Seraj B, Ghadimi S, Estaki Z, Fatemi M. Fracture resistance of three different posts in restoration of severely damaged primary anterior teeth: An in vitro study. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2015 Jul-Aug;12(4):372-8.

17. Mitsui FH, Marchi GM, Pimenta LA, Ferraresi PM. In vitro study of fracture resistance of bovine roots using different intraradicular post systems. Quintessence Int. 2004 Sep;35(8):612-6.

18. Subash D, Shoba K, Aman S, Bharkavi SKI, Nim-mi V, Abhilash R. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with Biodentine, resin modified GIC and hybrid composite resin as a core material. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017 Sep;11(9):ZC68-ZC70.

19. Gujjar KR, Indushekar KR. Comparison of the retentive strength of 3 different posts in restoring badly broken primary maxillary incisors. J Dent Child (Chic). 2010 Jan-Apr; 77(1):17-24.

20. Nordenvall KJ, Brannstrom M, Malmgren O. Etching of deciduous teeth and young and old permanent teeth. A comparison between 15 and 60 seconds of etching. Am J Orthod. 1980 Jul; 78 (1):99-108.

21. Sharaf AA. The application of fiber core posts in restoring badly destroyed primary incisors. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2002 Spring; 26 (3):217-24.

22. Rosa RS1 BC, Blando E, Mota EG, Oshima HM, Hirakata L, Pires LA, et al. Evaluation of me-chanical properties on three nanofilled composites. Stomatologija. 2012;14(4):126-30.

23. Roberson T, Heymann HO, Swift EJ. Clinical Sig-nificance of Dental Anatomy, Histology, Physiology and occlusion. Sturdevant's Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 5th ed., St Louis, Mosby; 2006. p. 29.

Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article

‎ 10.30699/jidai.31.3.139

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Fallahinejad Ghajari M, Majidi Rad H, Baghalian A. Fracture Resistance of Maxillary Primary Anterior Restorations Using Grandio and Grandio Flow Composites with Two Differ-ent Types of Posts: An In Vitro Study. J Iran Dent Assoc 2019; 31 (3) :139-145
URL: http://jida.ir/article-1-2051-en.html

Rights and permissions
	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Volume 31, Issue 3 (7-2019)

Back to browse issues page

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly

Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4645