• ISSN 16748301
  • CN 32-1810/R
Volume 25 Issue 6
Nov.  2011
Article Contents

Citation:

Fracture resistance of posterior teeth restored with modern restorative materials

  • Received Date: 2011-08-09
  • We studied the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars restored with recent restorative materials. Fifty max-illary premolars were divided into five groups: Group 1 were unprepared teeth; Group 2 were teeth prepared with-out restoration; Group 3 were teeth restored with tetric ceram HB; Group 4 were teeth restored with InTen S; and Group 5 were teeth restored with Admira. The samples were tested using a universal testing machine. Peak loads at fracture were recorded. The teeth restored with Admira had the highest fracture resistance followed by those re-stored with InTen-S and tetric ceram HB. Prepared, unrestored teeth were the weakest group. There was a signifi-cant difference between the fracture resistance of intact teeth and the prepared, unrestored teeth. There was also a significant difference among the tested restorative materials. Teeth restored with Admira showed no significant difference when compared with the unprepared teeth. It was concluded that the teeth restored with Admira exhib-ited the highest fracture resistance.
  • 加载中
  • 加载中

Article Metrics

Article views(2827) PDF downloads(2576) Cited by()

Related
Proportional views
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Fracture resistance of posterior teeth restored with modern restorative materials

  • 1. Department of Biomaterials, Mansoura University, Al-Gomhoria St, Mansoura 35516, Egypt
  • 2. Department of Conservative Dentistry, Mansoura University, Al-Gomhoria St, Mansoura 35516, Egypt

Abstract: We studied the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars restored with recent restorative materials. Fifty max-illary premolars were divided into five groups: Group 1 were unprepared teeth; Group 2 were teeth prepared with-out restoration; Group 3 were teeth restored with tetric ceram HB; Group 4 were teeth restored with InTen S; and Group 5 were teeth restored with Admira. The samples were tested using a universal testing machine. Peak loads at fracture were recorded. The teeth restored with Admira had the highest fracture resistance followed by those re-stored with InTen-S and tetric ceram HB. Prepared, unrestored teeth were the weakest group. There was a signifi-cant difference between the fracture resistance of intact teeth and the prepared, unrestored teeth. There was also a significant difference among the tested restorative materials. Teeth restored with Admira showed no significant difference when compared with the unprepared teeth. It was concluded that the teeth restored with Admira exhib-ited the highest fracture resistance.

    HTML

Catalog

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return