Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2020; 14(02): 288-293
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1710141
Original Article

Effect of Casein Phosphopeptide–Amorphous Calcium Phosphate on Fracture Resistance of Reattached Tooth Fragments Using Conventional and Self-Adhesive Bioactive Flowable Composite

Maryam Firouzmandi
1   Oral and Dental Disease Research Center, Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
,
Neda Afzali
2   Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
,
Zahra Parsaie
2   Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
,
Najmeh Mohammadi
2   Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
› Author Affiliations Funding The authors thank the Vice-Chancellery of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences for supporting this research (Grant#19805).
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives The present study aimed to investigate the effect of casein phosphopeptide–amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) complex and the type of flowable composite (conventional or self-adhesive bioactive) on the fracture resistance of fractured incisors restored through reattachment technique.

Materials and Methods In this experimental in vitro study, 60 extracted bovine central mandibular incisors were randomly divided into six groups (n = 10) according to the reattachment technique. Their incisal edges were cut off to represent an enamel–dentin fracture. The fragment edges were reattached as follows: Group 1—selective etching and bonding followed by conventional flowable composite; Group 2—selective etching and bonding followed by bioactive flowable composite; Group 3 was like Group 2 but without applying bonding; Groups 4, 5, and 6 were similar to Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively, but both tooth fragments were pretreated with CPP-ACP-containing paste for 3 minutes. Fracture resistance was assessed by a universal testing machine.

Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed by SPSS—Statistical Package for the Social Sciences—software using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey post-hoc tests (α= 0.05).

Results The highest and lowest fracture resistance was recorded in Groups 5 (15.96 MPa) and Group 6 (1.95 MPa), respectively, being significantly different from the other groups. The mean fracture resistance of Groups 3 and 6 was significantly lower than the other groups (p < 0.05). However, Groups 1, 2, and 4 showed no difference in fracture resistance.

Conclusion Bioactive composite was not superior to conventional composite for fragment reattachment, but using it in self-adhesive mode reduced the fracture strength significantly. Yet, pretreatment with CPP-ACP, followed by application of adhesive, improved the fracture resistance of bioactive composite.

Keywords

bioactive - casein phosphopeptide–amorphous calcium phosphate - fracture resistance - reattachment technique


Publication History

Article published online:
05 June 2020

© .

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Andreasen JO, Andreasen FM, Andersson L. Crownroot Fractures. Textbook and Color Atlas of Traumatic Injuries to the Teeth. Wiley-Blackwell; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Jyothi M, Jyothirmayi B, Sirisha K, Mounika A, Girish K, Sruthi M. Reattachment-conservative management of complicated crown fractures in anterior teeth. Int J Appl Dent Sci 2016; 2: 10-13
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Belcheva A. Reattachment of fractured permanent incisors in schoolchildren. J IMAB 2009; 14: 93-96
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Joshi N, Shetty N, Kundabala M. Immediate reattachment of fractured tooth segment using dual cure resin. Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ) 2008; 6 (23) 386-388 (KUMJ)
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Macedo GV, Diaz PI, De O Fernandes CA, Ritter AV. Reattachment of anterior teeth fragments: a conservative approach. J Esthet Restor Dent 2008; 20 (01) 5-18, discussion 19–20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Reis A, Loguercio AD, Kraul A, Matson E. Reattachment of fractured teeth: a review of literature regarding techniques and materials. Oper Dent 2004; 29 (02) 226-233
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Maia EA, Baratieri LN, de Andrada MA, Monteiro Jr S, de Araújo Jr EM. Tooth fragment reattachment: fundamentals of the technique and two case reports. Quintessence Int 2003; 34 (02) 99-107
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Worthington RB, Murchison DF, Vandewalle KS. Incisal edge reattachment: the effect of preparation utilization and design. Quintessence Int 1999; 30 (09) 637-643
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 De Santis R, Prisco D, Nazhat SN. et al. Mechanical strength of tooth fragment reattachment. J Biomed Mater Res 2001; 55 (04) 629-636
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Farik B, Munksgaard EC. Fracture strength of intact and fragment-bonded teeth at various velocities of the applied force. Eur J Oral Sci 1999; 107 (01) 70-73
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R. et al. Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res 2004; 83 (06) 454-458
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Farik B, Munksgaard EC, Andreasen JO, Kreiborg S. Fractured teeth bonded with dentin adhesives with and without unfilled resin. Dent Traumatol 2002; 18 (02) 66-69
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lo Giudice G, Lipari F, Lizio A, Cervino G, Cicciù M. Tooth fragment reattachment technique on a pluri traumatized tooth. J Conserv Dent 2012; 15 (01) 80-83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wiegand A, Rödig T, Attin T. [Treatment of crown fractured incisors: reattachment instead of restoration?]. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 2005; 115 (12) 1172-1181
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Demarco FF, Fay RM, Pinzon LM, Powers JM. Fracture resistance of re-attached coronal fragments–influence of different adhesive materials and bevel preparation. Dent Traumatol 2004; 20 (03) 157-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Shafiei F, Memarpour M, Jowkar Z. Marginal sealing of a porcelain laminate veneer luted with three different resin cements on fluorosed teeth. Int J Esthet Dent 2017; 12 (01) 60-71
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Elgamily H, Safwat E, Soliman Z, Salama H, El-Sayed H, Anwar M. Antibacterial and remineralization efficacy of casein phosphopeptide, glycomacropeptide nanocomplex, and probiotics in experimental toothpastes: an in vitro comparative study. Eur J Dent 2019; 13 (03) 391-398
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Karami M, Shirani F, Kaveh S, Talaee S, Salehi E. Shear bond strength of composite to primary enamel treated with casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium phosphate using total-etch and self-etch bonding systems. J Islam Dent Assoc Iran 2015; 27: 2
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Sauro S, Makeeva I, Faus-Matoses V. et al. Effects of ions-releasing restorative materials on the dentine bonding longevity of modern universal adhesives after load-cycle and prolonged artificial saliva aging. Materials (Basel) 2019; 12 (05) 722
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Gjorgievska E, Nicholson JW, Iljovska S, Slipper IJ. Marginal adaptation and performance of bioactive dental restorative materials in deciduous and young permanent teeth. J Appl Oral Sci 2008; 16 (01) 1-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Owens BM, Phebus JG, Johnson WW. Evaluation of the marginal integrity of a bioactive restorative material. Gen Dent 2018; 66 (03) 32-36
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Croll TP, Berg JH, Donly KJ. Dental repair material: a resin-modified glass-ionomer bioactive ionic resin-based composite. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2015; 36 (01) 60-65
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Shirani F, Sakhaei Manesh V, Malekipour MR. Preservation of coronal tooth fragments prior to reattachment. Aust Dent J 2013; 58 (03) 321-325
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rosa WL, Piva E, Silva AF. Bond strength of universal adhesives: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2015; 43 (07) 765-776
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Poitevin A, De Munck J, Van Ende A. et al. Bonding effectiveness of self-adhesive composites to dentin and enamel. Dent Mater 2013; 29 (02) 221-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Doozaneh M, Koohpeima F, Firouzmandi M, Abbassiyan F. Shear bond strength of self-adhering flowable composite and resin-modified glass ionomer to two pulp capping materials. Iran Endod J 2017; 12 (01) 103-107
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Bruschi-Alonso RC, Alonso RCB, Correr GM. et al. Reattachment of anterior fractured teeth: effect of materials and techniques on impact strength. Dent Traumatol 2010; 26 (04) 315-322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Adebayo OA, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Effects of conditioners on microshear bond strength to enamel after carbamide peroxide bleaching and/or casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) treatment. J Dent 2007; 35 (11) 862-870
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 LeSage BP. Minimally invasive dentistry: paradigm shifts in preparation design. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2009; 21 (02) 97-101, quiz 102, 116
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Xiaojun D, Jing L, Xuehua G. et al. Effects of CPP-ACP paste on the shear bond strength of orthodontic brackets. Angle Orthod 2009; 79 (05) 945-950
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Doozandeh M, Firouzmandi M, Mirmohammadi M. The simultaneous effect of extended etching time and casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate containing paste application on shear bond strength of etch-and-rinse adhesive to caries-affected dentin. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015; 16 (10) 794-799
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Jalannavar P, Tavargeri A. Influence of storage media and duration of fragment in the media on the bond strength of the reattached tooth fragment. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2018; 11 (02) 83-88
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Araújo DFGd, Borges BCD, Mendes AM, Souza-Junior EJ, Assunção IVd, Santos AJSd. CPP–ACP pretreatment effect on microshear bond strength of simplified etch-and-rinse adhesive systems plus a flowable composite to enamel. J Adhes Sci Technol 2015; 29: 109-115
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Adebayo OA, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. Dentine bonding after CPP-ACP paste treatment with and without conditioning. J Dent 2008; 36 (12) 1013-1024
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Yang H, Pei D, Chen Z, Lei J, Zhou L, Huang C. Effects of the application sequence of calcium-containing desensitising pastes during etch-and-rinse adhesive restoration. J Dent 2014; 42 (09) 1115-1123
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Shafiei F, Derafshi R, Memarpour M. Bond strength of self-adhering materials: effect of dentin-desensitizing treatment with a CPP-ACP paste. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2017; 37 (06) e337-e343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Reis A, Kraul A, Francci C. et al. Re-attachment of anterior fractured teeth: fracture strength using different materials. Oper Dent 2002; 27 (06) 621-627
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Sarraf P, Nekoofar MH, Sheykhrezae MS, Dummer PMH. Fracture resistance of immature incisors following root filling with various bioactive endodontic cements using an experimental bovine tooth model. Eur J Dent 2019; 13 (02) 156-160
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar