Article

In vitro comparison of the flexibility of different splint systems used in dental traumatology.

School of Dentistry, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Dental Traumatology (Impact Factor: 1). 02/2010; 26(1):30-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2009.00843.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of the study was to evaluate the flexibility of five different splint systems [polyethylene fibre-reinforced splint (Ribbond THM, Ribbond Inc., Seattle, WA, USA), resin splint (RS), wire-composite splint (WCS), button-bracket splint (BS) and titanium trauma splint (TTS)] commonly used in clinical practice for the treatment of dental traumatic injuries involving the periodontal supporting tissues.
For the experimental study, a resin cast of the upper arch was manufactured, where teeth 11, 12 and 21 (used for the stress analysis) were inserted in a non-rigid fashion so as to allow for replacement, whereas the other teeth were permanently fixed to the corresponding sockets. Two different test sessions were performed for each splint: (i) stress analysis with increasing intensity ranging between 0 and 50 N directed along the tooth's longitudinal axis; (ii) stress analysis with 45 degrees of oblique force of increasing intensity ranging between 0 and 30 N. For each loading direction, five recordings were conducted without a splint, followed by five with the splint applied. The energy required to modify the position of the teeth was calculated for both the splinted and un-splinted teeth and the difference between the two values was determined. Energy variation was assessed for the testing of both axial (DeltaE(a)) and oblique force (DeltaE(o)). DeltaE represents the rigidity index of the analysed contention devices: high DeltaE values correspond to high rigidity materials.
The RS showed the highest DeltaE value for the axial stress analysis, whereas the highest DeltaE value at a 45 degrees was recorded for the WCS and RS. For both tests, the lowest DeltaE values were recorded for the TTS and Ribbond THM splints.
The data show that the contention devices with the highest flexibility are the TTS and the Ribbond THM as they exhibit a lower energy variation needed for splint deformation compared with the other materials that were examined.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
239 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate a dynamic and static tooth mobility assessment method in terms of reproducibility and correlation. A custom-made artificial model was used. The central incisors simulated 'injured' teeth with increased mobility, and the lateral incisors served as 'uninjured' teeth with physiological mobility. To assess tooth mobility, three consecutively repeated measurements were taken, in the vertical and horizontal dimensions before and after splinting, using the Periotest method as well as the Zwick universal testing machine. Reproducibility of the measurements was tested using anova and the Bonferroni post hoc test (α = 0.05). Correlation was analysed using Spearman's rank correlation (α = 0.05). No significant differences were found when comparing the three consecutively taken Periotest values and the vertical Zwick values (P > 0.05). In the horizontal dimension, the first Zwick values differed from the second and third values (P < 0.05). Only a few random correlations (P < 0.05) were found when comparing the two assessment methods. Horizontal and vertical measurements within one method did not correlate (P > 0.05). The Periotest and vertical Zwick values are highly reproducible. The measurements of the two methods do not correlate; therefore, a conversion of Periotest values into metric displacement data is not feasible. The two methods provide different valuable information about tooth mobility. The Periotest method describes the damping characteristics of the periodontal ligament while the Zwick method reveals quantitative metric values.
    Dental Traumatology 07/2011; 27(6):414-21. · 1.00 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: To assess the shear bond strength to unground human enamel (ESBS) and flexural strength (FS) of different reinforcing fibers used in combination with a flowable composite resin. Materials and Methods: For ESBS testing, 90 human molars were selected and randomly divided into 9 groups (n = 10) according to the reinforcing fiber to be tested: 1. RTD Quartz Splint additionally impregnated at chairside with Quartz Splint Resin (RTD); 2. RTD Quartz Splint without additional impregnation; 3. Ribbond-THM (Ribbond) impregnated with OptiBond FL Adhesive; 4: Ribbond Triaxial (Ribbond) impregnated with OptiBond FL Adhesive; 5. Connect (Kerr) impregnated with OptiBond FL Adhesive; 6. Construct (Kerr) impregnated with Opti- Bond FL Adhesive; 7. everStick PERIO (Stick Tech); 8. everStick C&B (Stick Tech); 9. nonreinforced composite Premise flowable (Kerr). Cylinders of flowable composite reinforced with the fibers were bonded to the intact buccal surface of the teeth. After 24 h of storage, shear loading was performed until failure occurred. FS was assessed performing three-point bending test according to ISO Standard 4049/2000. ESBS and FS data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey's HSD test for post-hoc comparisons (p < 0.05). Results: For each group, the ESBS and FS, respectively, in MPa were: 1. 17.07 ± 4.52 and 472.69 ± 30.49; 2. 14.98 ± 3.92 and 441.77 ± 61.43; 3. 18.59 ± 5.67 and 186.89 ± 43.89; 4. 16.74 ± 6.27 and 314.41 ± 148.52; 5. 14.38 ± 4.14 and 223.80 ± 77.35; 6. 16.00 ± 5.55 and 287.62 ± 85.91; 7. 16.42 ± 3.67 and 285.35 ± 39.68; 8. 23.24 ± 5.81 and 370.46 ± 29.26; 9. 12.58 ± 4.76 and 87.75 ± 22.87. For most fibers, no significant difference in ESBS was found compared to the control group, except for everStick C&B, which yielded higher ESBS. Nonreinforced composite exhibited the lowest FS, while all fibers positively affected the FS. Conclusions: Fiber reinforcement of flowable composite does not affect its ESBS. The flexural strength of FRCs is significantly influenced by fiber composition and pattern.
    The journal of adhesive dentistry 09/2012; · 0.91 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: AIM: To evaluate the influence of adhesive point dimension and splint type on the rigidity of wire-composite splints in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A custom-made artificial model was used. The two central incisors served as injured teeth (degrees of loosening III and II) and the two lateral incisors as non-injured teeth (physiological mobility). Horizontal and vertical tooth mobilities were investigated before and after splinting with the Periotest(®) method; the percent change was taken as the relative splint effect. Teeth were splinted with three types of wire-composite splints: Dentaflex (0.45 mm), Strengtheners (0.8 × 1.8 mm), and Dentaflex completely covered with composite. Four adhesive point dimensions (2, 3, 4, and 5 mm) were evaluated. Normal distribution was tested with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Differences were evaluated with the anova and post hoc tests for pair-wise comparisons. Significance level was set at 0.05. RESULTS: The adhesive point dimension did not influence splint rigidity, in general ( P = 0.288). Significant effects were found in non-injured teeth with the Dentaflex ( P < 0.001) and in injured teeth with the Strengtheners ( P < 0.001). The Strengtheners splint rigidity increased significantly with increasing adhesive point dimensions. The three splints showed significantly different effects at 5-mm adhesive point dimension ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Splint rigidity for injured teeth was influenced by adhesive point dimension only when splinting with Strengtheners. We recommend adapting splint rigidity by selecting different wires and reducing the adhesive point dimension to a minimum. Dentaflex can be used for flexible splinting, Strengtheners, and composite covered Dentaflex for rigid splinting.
    Dental Traumatology 07/2012; · 1.00 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
310 Downloads
Available from
May 20, 2014