Journal Basic Info

  • Impact Factor: 1.989**
  • H-Index: 6
  • ISSN: 2637-4625
  • DOI: 10.25107/2637-4625
**Impact Factor calculated based on Google Scholar Citations. Please contact us for any more details.

Major Scope

  •  Dental Surgery
  •  Spine Surgery
  •  Otolaryngology & ENT Surgery
  •  Bariatric Surgery
  •  Breast Surgery
  •  Emergency Surgery
  •  Colorectal Surgery
  •  Robotic Surgery

Abstract

Citation: World J Surg Surg Res. 2022;5(1):1413.DOI: 10.25107/2637-4625.1413

Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Three Different Restorative Materials in Teeth Restored with Tunnel Preparation - An In Vitro Study

Hemalatha H, Pooja M, Pankaj V, Sadanand K, Shivangi T and Rathi SS

Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, College of Dental Science and Hospital, India Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry, India Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, JNU Medical College and Hospital, India Sri Aurobindo College of Dentistry, India Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, ITS Centre for Dental Studies and Research, India

*Correspondance to: Shivangi Trivedi 

 PDF  Full Text Research Article | Open Access

Abstract:

Background: The tunnel concept accesses proximal dentinal carious lesions from the occlusal surface. This concept aims to preserve the marginal ridge and to minimize the loss of healthy tooth structure, thus saving clinical time as well as conserve the strength of tooth. The aim of the study was to investigate the fracture resistance of three different restorative materials in teeth with tunnel preparations. Methods and Materials: Fifty fully formed human maxillary premolars were selected for this in vitro study and divided into four main groups (N=10) Group 1: Biodentine, Group 2: Bioglass R, Group 3: Fiber reinforced composite, Group 4: Glass Ionomer Cement and Group 5: Control. Tunnel preparation was done using a round bur and fracture resistance was checked using a Universal Testing Machine (UTM). Results: The mean comparison of values between the groups was found to be statistically significant (F=3722.01, P value <0.05). To find out the pair wise comparisons, post-hoc Turkey test was applied and mean difference of all the comparisons was found to be statistically significant (P value <0.05). Conclusion: Considering the materials chosen to restore the tunnel prepared teeth, fiber reinforced composite proved to be superior in demonstrating good fracture resistance followed by Biodentine, Bioglass R and conventional glass ionomer cement.

Keywords:

Biodentine; Bioglass R; Conventional glass ionomer cement; Fiber reinforced composite; Tunnel restoration

Cite the Article:

Hemalatha H, Pooja M, Pankaj V, Sadanand K, Shivangi T, Rathi SS. Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Three Different Restorative Materials in Teeth Restored with Tunnel Preparation - An In Vitro Study. World J Surg Surgical Res. 2022; 5: 1413..

Search Our Journal

Journal Indexed In

Articles with Grants

Laparoscopic Ureteral Pyeloplasty for Hydronephrosis due to Crossing of the Posterior Ureter by the Inferior Polar Renal Artery
 Abstract  PDF  Full Text
Detection of Human Cytomegalovirus by Clinical Metagenomics in a Non-Healing Wound of Recurrent Malignant Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor
 Abstract  PDF  Full Text
View More...