BACKGROUND/AIM: The present study was undertaken to evaluate and compare the fracture strength of various restorative materials and designs used in the reattachment of anterior fractured teeth. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Sound human maxillary central incisors were selected for the study. These teeth were fractured using universal testing machine so as to obtain Ellis class II fracture with intact fragment. The fractured fragment was reattached to the tooth using three restorative materials namely, bonding agent, resin luting cement and nano-composite, and designs incorporated were simply bonding the fragment to the tooth and other one included a chamfer along the fractured line. The reattached teeth were again fractured and the mean fracture strength values recorded. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: A combination of nano-composite (best material) and chamfer preparation (best design) gave the highest mean fracture strength values.
BACKGROUND/AIM: The present study was undertaken to evaluate and compare the fracture strength of various restorative materials and designs used in the reattachment of anterior fractured teeth. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Sound human maxillary central incisors were selected for the study. These teeth were fractured using universal testing machine so as to obtain Ellis class II fracture with intact fragment. The fractured fragment was reattached to the tooth using three restorative materials namely, bonding agent, resin luting cement and nano-composite, and designs incorporated were simply bonding the fragment to the tooth and other one included a chamfer along the fractured line. The reattached teeth were again fractured and the mean fracture strength values recorded. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: A combination of nano-composite (best material) and chamfer preparation (best design) gave the highest mean fracture strength values.