Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2008 |
Tipo de documento: | Tese |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional PUCRS |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10923/453 |
Resumo: | This study evaluated the influence of different restoration techniques on the load and type of fracture in endodontically treated pre-molars. Sixty maxillary premolars were divided into the following groups: G1 – healthy; G2 – MOD cavity and direct restoration with Four Season inlay; G3 –MOD cavity and indirect restoration with Adoro inlay; G5 – MOD cavity and restoration with Empress inlay; G4 and G6 – similar to groups 3 and 5, respectively, but with covering the cuspids (onlay). Endodontic treatment was performed in Groups 2 to 6. The specimens were submitted to the compression test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0. 5 mm/minute. The type of fracture was classified as follows: Fracture Type I – restricted to the restoration; Fracture Type II – restoration and dental cuspid above the amelocemental junction; Fracture Type III – restoration and dental cuspid below the amelocemental junction; Fracture Type IV – restoration and cuspid below the amelocemental junction with exposure of the pulp chamber; Fracture Type V – along the root. The means of the fracture load values were submitted to Analysis of Variance and the Tukey test, and the results of the fracture type were submitted to the Kruskal-Wallis test at a level of significance of 5%. There was statistically significant difference in the fracture load among the groups (p=0,01). The highest fracture load value was obtained in the group of healthy teeth (1370. 61 N), not differing statistically from the onlay group in Empress (1304. 21 N), both values being statistically higher than those of the other groups. Intermediate values were obtained for the groups inlay in Empress (918. 76 N), onlay in Adoro (861. 15 N) and inlay in Adoro (792. 71 N), which did not differ statistically among them.The lowest fracture load value was obtained for the group with direct restoration with Four Season (666. 08 N) group, which did not differ statistically from the inlay group in Adoro. As regards the type of fracture, there was statistically significant difference among the groups (p=0. 001). The groups onlay in Adoro and healthy teeth did not differ statistically between them, presenting the highest percentage of fractures with the best prognosis (without pulp chamber exposure), and no tooth fractured along the root. Whereas the other experimental groups also did not differ statistically among them, but all presented fractures extending along the root (the worst prognosis). |
id |
PUCR_72ec14d27c9d830f151125fefbf4f9a3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.pucrs.br:10923/453 |
network_acronym_str |
PUCR |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional PUCRS |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Silva, Ana Amélia Bianchi eSpohr, Ana Maria2011-12-27T14:14:17Z2011-12-27T14:14:17Z2008http://hdl.handle.net/10923/453This study evaluated the influence of different restoration techniques on the load and type of fracture in endodontically treated pre-molars. Sixty maxillary premolars were divided into the following groups: G1 – healthy; G2 – MOD cavity and direct restoration with Four Season inlay; G3 –MOD cavity and indirect restoration with Adoro inlay; G5 – MOD cavity and restoration with Empress inlay; G4 and G6 – similar to groups 3 and 5, respectively, but with covering the cuspids (onlay). Endodontic treatment was performed in Groups 2 to 6. The specimens were submitted to the compression test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0. 5 mm/minute. The type of fracture was classified as follows: Fracture Type I – restricted to the restoration; Fracture Type II – restoration and dental cuspid above the amelocemental junction; Fracture Type III – restoration and dental cuspid below the amelocemental junction; Fracture Type IV – restoration and cuspid below the amelocemental junction with exposure of the pulp chamber; Fracture Type V – along the root. The means of the fracture load values were submitted to Analysis of Variance and the Tukey test, and the results of the fracture type were submitted to the Kruskal-Wallis test at a level of significance of 5%. There was statistically significant difference in the fracture load among the groups (p=0,01). The highest fracture load value was obtained in the group of healthy teeth (1370. 61 N), not differing statistically from the onlay group in Empress (1304. 21 N), both values being statistically higher than those of the other groups. Intermediate values were obtained for the groups inlay in Empress (918. 76 N), onlay in Adoro (861. 15 N) and inlay in Adoro (792. 71 N), which did not differ statistically among them.The lowest fracture load value was obtained for the group with direct restoration with Four Season (666. 08 N) group, which did not differ statistically from the inlay group in Adoro. As regards the type of fracture, there was statistically significant difference among the groups (p=0. 001). The groups onlay in Adoro and healthy teeth did not differ statistically between them, presenting the highest percentage of fractures with the best prognosis (without pulp chamber exposure), and no tooth fractured along the root. Whereas the other experimental groups also did not differ statistically among them, but all presented fractures extending along the root (the worst prognosis).Este trabalho avaliou a influência de diferentes técnicas restauradoras na carga e no tipo de fratura em premolares tratados endodonticamente. Sessenta premolares superiores foram divididos nos seguintes grupos: G1 – hígidos; G2 – cavidade MOD e restauração direta com Four Season tipo inlay; G3 – cavidade MOD e restauração indireta com Adoro tipo inlay; G5 – cavidade MOD e restauração com Empress tipo inlay; G4 e G6 – semelhantes aos grupos 3 e 5, respectivamente, mas com cobertura de cúspides (tipo onlay). Foi realizada endodontia nos grupos 2 a 6. Os corpos-de-prova foram submetidos ao ensaio de compressão em máquina de ensaio universal com velocidade de 0,5 mm/minuto. O tipo de fratura foi classificado da seguinte forma: fratura tipo I – restrita à restauração; fratura tipo II – restauração e cúspide dentária acima da junção amelocementária; fratura tipo III – restauração e cúspide dentária abaixo da junção amelocementária; fratura tipo IV – restauração e cúspide abaixo da junção amelocementária com exposição da câmara pulpar; fratura tipo V – ao longo da raiz. As médias dos valores de carga de fratura foram submetidos à Análise de Variância e Teste de Tukey, e os resultados do tipo de fratura foram submetidos ao teste Kruskal-Wallis ao nível de significância foi de 5%.Houve diferença estatisticamente significante na carga de fratura entre os grupos (p=0,01). O maior valor de carga de fratura foi obtido no grupo dos dentes hígidos (1370,61 N), não diferindo estatisticamente do grupo onlay em Empress (1304,21 N), sendo ambos os valores estatisticamente superiores aos demais grupos. Valores intermediários foram obtidos para os grupos inlay em Empress (918,76 N), onlay em Adoro (861,15 N) e inlay em Adoro (792,71 N), os quais não diferiram estatisticamente entre si. O menor valor de carga de fratura foi obtido para o grupo da restauração direta com Four Season (666,08 N), não diferindo estatisticamente do grupo inlay em Adoro. Também houve diferença estatística significativa para o tipo de fratura entre os grupos (p=0,001). Os grupos onlay em Adoro e hígidos não diferiram estatisticamente entre si, apresentando maior porcentagem de fraturas com melhor prognóstico (sem exposição da câmara pulpar), e nenhum dente com fratura ao longo da raiz. Já os demais grupos experimentais também não diferiram estatisticamente entre si, mas todos apresentaram fraturas se estendendo ao longo da raiz (pior prognóstico).Made available in DSpace on 2011-12-27T14:14:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 000406883-0.pdf: 1791767 bytes, checksum: 2bb90cc0781205c8981e1781f9ba9327 (MD5) license.txt: 581 bytes, checksum: 44ea52f0b7567232681c6e3d72285adc (MD5)Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do SulPorto AlegreODONTOLOGIARESINAS (ODONTOLOGIA)CERÂMICA DENTÁRIAMATERIAIS DENTÁRIOSFRATURAS DENTÁRIASRESTAURAÇÃO DENTÁRIADENTÍSTICAENDODONTIAInfluência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamenteinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisPontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do SulFaculdade de OdontologiaPrograma de Pós-Graduação em OdontologiaDoutorado2008porreponame:Repositório Institucional PUCRSinstname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS)instacron:PUC_RSinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessORIGINAL000406883-0.pdfTexto Completoapplication/pdf1791767repositorio.pucrs.br/jspui/bitstream/10923/453/1/000406883-0.pdf2bb90cc0781205c8981e1781f9ba9327MD51LICENSElicense.txttext/plain581repositorio.pucrs.br/jspui/bitstream/10923/453/2/license.txt44ea52f0b7567232681c6e3d72285adcMD52TEXT000406883-0.pdf.txt000406883-0.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain128934repositorio.pucrs.br/jspui/bitstream/10923/453/3/000406883-0.pdf.txt6077765c2ba32d33a204c37081df3610MD5310923/4532017-09-28 11:05:34.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ório InstitucionalPRI |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente |
title |
Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente |
spellingShingle |
Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente Silva, Ana Amélia Bianchi e ODONTOLOGIA RESINAS (ODONTOLOGIA) CERÂMICA DENTÁRIA MATERIAIS DENTÁRIOS FRATURAS DENTÁRIAS RESTAURAÇÃO DENTÁRIA DENTÍSTICA ENDODONTIA |
title_short |
Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente |
title_full |
Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente |
title_fullStr |
Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente |
title_full_unstemmed |
Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente |
title_sort |
Influência do preparo cavitário e do material restaurador na carga e no tipo de fratura de premolares tratados endodonticamente |
author |
Silva, Ana Amélia Bianchi e |
author_facet |
Silva, Ana Amélia Bianchi e |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Silva, Ana Amélia Bianchi e |
dc.contributor.advisor1.fl_str_mv |
Spohr, Ana Maria |
contributor_str_mv |
Spohr, Ana Maria |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
ODONTOLOGIA RESINAS (ODONTOLOGIA) CERÂMICA DENTÁRIA MATERIAIS DENTÁRIOS FRATURAS DENTÁRIAS RESTAURAÇÃO DENTÁRIA DENTÍSTICA ENDODONTIA |
topic |
ODONTOLOGIA RESINAS (ODONTOLOGIA) CERÂMICA DENTÁRIA MATERIAIS DENTÁRIOS FRATURAS DENTÁRIAS RESTAURAÇÃO DENTÁRIA DENTÍSTICA ENDODONTIA |
description |
This study evaluated the influence of different restoration techniques on the load and type of fracture in endodontically treated pre-molars. Sixty maxillary premolars were divided into the following groups: G1 – healthy; G2 – MOD cavity and direct restoration with Four Season inlay; G3 –MOD cavity and indirect restoration with Adoro inlay; G5 – MOD cavity and restoration with Empress inlay; G4 and G6 – similar to groups 3 and 5, respectively, but with covering the cuspids (onlay). Endodontic treatment was performed in Groups 2 to 6. The specimens were submitted to the compression test in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0. 5 mm/minute. The type of fracture was classified as follows: Fracture Type I – restricted to the restoration; Fracture Type II – restoration and dental cuspid above the amelocemental junction; Fracture Type III – restoration and dental cuspid below the amelocemental junction; Fracture Type IV – restoration and cuspid below the amelocemental junction with exposure of the pulp chamber; Fracture Type V – along the root. The means of the fracture load values were submitted to Analysis of Variance and the Tukey test, and the results of the fracture type were submitted to the Kruskal-Wallis test at a level of significance of 5%. There was statistically significant difference in the fracture load among the groups (p=0,01). The highest fracture load value was obtained in the group of healthy teeth (1370. 61 N), not differing statistically from the onlay group in Empress (1304. 21 N), both values being statistically higher than those of the other groups. Intermediate values were obtained for the groups inlay in Empress (918. 76 N), onlay in Adoro (861. 15 N) and inlay in Adoro (792. 71 N), which did not differ statistically among them.The lowest fracture load value was obtained for the group with direct restoration with Four Season (666. 08 N) group, which did not differ statistically from the inlay group in Adoro. As regards the type of fracture, there was statistically significant difference among the groups (p=0. 001). The groups onlay in Adoro and healthy teeth did not differ statistically between them, presenting the highest percentage of fractures with the best prognosis (without pulp chamber exposure), and no tooth fractured along the root. Whereas the other experimental groups also did not differ statistically among them, but all presented fractures extending along the root (the worst prognosis). |
publishDate |
2008 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2008 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2011-12-27T14:14:17Z |
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2011-12-27T14:14:17Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
format |
doctoralThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10923/453 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10923/453 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul Porto Alegre |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul Porto Alegre |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional PUCRS instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) instacron:PUC_RS |
instname_str |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) |
instacron_str |
PUC_RS |
institution |
PUC_RS |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional PUCRS |
collection |
Repositório Institucional PUCRS |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
repositorio.pucrs.br/jspui/bitstream/10923/453/1/000406883-0.pdf repositorio.pucrs.br/jspui/bitstream/10923/453/2/license.txt repositorio.pucrs.br/jspui/bitstream/10923/453/3/000406883-0.pdf.txt |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
2bb90cc0781205c8981e1781f9ba9327 44ea52f0b7567232681c6e3d72285adc 6077765c2ba32d33a204c37081df3610 |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
|
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1731736511866470400 |