In vitro study evaluates fracture strength of reattached tooth fragments with different techniques and adhesives, suggesting optimal strategies for treatment.
AbstractBackground: Traumatic fractures of anterior teeth are common and can adversely affect aesthetics, function, and psychological well being. Fragment reattachment is a conservative treatment modality, and its success largely depends on the reattachment technique and bonding system used.Aim: To evaluate and compare the fracture strength of reattached anterior tooth fragments using external chamfer and internal dentinal groove techniques with 5th and 7th generation bonding agents.Materials and Methods: Eighty extracted maxillary anterior teeth were selected and divided into three groups: external chamfer (n=32), internal dentinal groove (n=32), and control (n=16).Experimental groups were further subdivided based on the bonding agent used. Standardized incisal fractures were created, and fragments were reattached using the respective techniques.Fracture resistance was tested using a universal testing machine. Data were analyzed using SPSS with one way ANOVA, post hoc Tukey test, and Student's t-test at a significance level of p < 0.05.Results: The control group showed the highest fracture strength. No significant difference was observed between the two main reattachment techniques. However, subgroup analysis revealed significant differences, with the internal dentinal groove combined with a 7th generation bonding agent demonstrating the highest fracture resistance among experimental groups, while the internal groove with 5th generation bonding agent showed the lowest values.Conclusion: Fragment reattachment is a reliable and conservative treatment option, though it does not fully restore the strength of intact teeth. Both reattachment technique and bonding agent significantly influence fracture resistance. The internal dentinal groove technique with a 7th generation bonding agent showed superior performance, highlighting the importance of appropriate technique and material selection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zalak Jain (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: