H-Index
79
Scimago Lab
powered by Scopus
JCR
Clarivate
Analytics
14%
Acceptance
Rate
call: +1.631.470.9640
Mon-Fri 10 am - 2 pm EST

Logo

Medical Science Monitor Basic Research
AmJCaseRep

Annals
ISI-Home

eISSN: 1643-3750

Comparison of Load-Bearing Capacities of 3-Unit Fiber-Reinforced Composite Adhesive Bridges with Different Framework Designs

Ibrahim H. Tacir, Roda S. Dirihan, Zelal Seyfioglu Polat, Gizem Ön Salman, Pekka Vallittu, Lippo Lassila, Emrah Ayna

Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey

Med Sci Monit 2018; 24: LBR4440-4448

DOI: 10.12659/MSM.909271

Available online: 2018-06-28

Published: 2018-06-28


#909271

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the load-bearing capacities of three-unit direct resin-bonded fiber-reinforced composite fixed dental prosthesis with different framework designs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty mandibular premolar and molar teeth without caries were collected and direct glass fiber-resin fixed FDPs were divided into 6 groups (n=10). Each group was restored via direct technique with different designs. In Group 1, the inlay-retained bridges formed 2 unidirectional FRC frameworks and pontic-reinforced transversal FRC. In Group 2, the inlay-retained bridges were supported by unidirectional lingual and occlusal FRC frameworks. Group 3, had buccal and lingual unidirectional FRC frameworks without the inlay cavities. Group 4 had reinforced inlay cavities and buccal-lingual FRC with unidirectional FRC frameworks. Group 5, had a circular form of fiber reinforcement around cusps in addition to buccal-lingual FRC frameworks. Group 6 had a circular form of fiber reinforcement around cusps with 2 bidirectional FRC frameworks into inlay cavities. All groups were loaded until final fracture using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min.
RESULTS: Mean values of the groups were determined with ANOVA and Tukey HSD. When all data were evaluated, Group 6 had the highest load-bearing capacities and revealed significant differences from Group 3 and Group 4. Group 6 had the highest strain (p>0.05). When the fracture patterns were investigated, Group 6 had the durability to sustain fracture propagation within the restoration.
CONCLUSIONS: The efficiency of fiber reinforcement of the restorations alters not only the amount of fiber, but also the design of the restoration with fibers.

Keywords: Adhesives, Composite Resins, Light-Curing of Dental Adhesives



Back