Evaluation of Effect of Duration of the Fragment in the Storage Media and Influence of Storage Media on Reattached Tooth Fragment: An In Vitro Study
Neena I Eregowda, Kashmira P Pawar, Poornima Parameshwarappa, Mallikarjuna Kenchchapa, Roopa Korishettar, Kavyarani B Siddalingaswamy
Apagard M-Plus, Fragment reattachment, GC Tooth Mousse Plus, GC Tooth Mousse, Hanks’ balanced salt solution, Nano-hydroxyapatite, Storage media
Citation Information :
Eregowda NI, Pawar KP, Parameshwarappa P, Kenchchapa M, Korishettar R, Siddalingaswamy KB. Evaluation of Effect of Duration of the Fragment in the Storage Media and Influence of Storage Media on Reattached Tooth Fragment: An In Vitro Study. CODS J Dent 2022; 14 (2):46-51.
Background: Fragment reattachment is an excellent option for coronal fractures of permanent incisors when the fragment is available. The mode of storage of the fragment in different media and the reattachment time is a very important factor in the success of fragment reattachment.
Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare the effects of time of the fragment in storage media and the influence of the storage media on the reattached tooth fragment.
Methodology: Sixty sound incisors were taken, split into four groups of 15 specimens each. They were further subdivided into eight subgroups of seven specimens (A1, B1, C1, and D1) and eight specimens (A2, B2, C2, and D2), respectively. The teeth were sectioned, and the fragments were stored in Hanks’ balanced salt solution (HBSS) (group A1 and B2), GC Tooth Mousse (group B1 and B2), GC Tooth Mousse Plus (group C1 and C2), and nano-hydroxyapatite (nHA)—nfused dentifrice (group D1 and D2) for 12 and 24 hours, respectively. Fragments were reattached using the simple reattachment technique with flowable composite resin. The compressive strength was measured using a universal strength-testing machine.
Result: Significant difference was found among group A vs B, group A vs C, and group A vs D at 24 hours. Insignificant differences were noted in the 12 hours group.
Conclusion: Highest fracture resistance was seen in group D2, followed by B2, B1, D1, C2, C1, A1, and A2.
Sharmin DD, Thomas E. Evaluation of the effect of storage medium on fragment reattachment. Dent Traumatol 2013;29(2):99–102. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2012.01143.x
Shilpa N, Rao VV, Vasepalli M, et al. Effect of storage media on fracture resistance of reattachment tooth fragment: an in vitro comparative study 2017;5(4):1604–1609. DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/3988
Mantri V, Palekar A, Dhoka A, et al. Evaluation of the effect of storage medium on fragment reattachment. Int J Prev Clin Dent Res 2017;4(3):1–5.
Hegde RJ, Kale SJ. Comparison of the effect of various storage media on the fracture resistance of the reattached incisor tooth fragments: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Sci 2017;9(4):233–236. DOI: 10.4103/IJDS.IJDS_70_17
Prabhakar AR, Yavagal CM, Limaye NS, et al. Effect of storage media on fracture resistance of reattached tooth fragments using G-aenial Universal Flo. J Conserv Dent 2016;19(3):250–253. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.181942
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(2):83–88. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1490
Garcia FC, Poubel DL, Almeida JC, et al. Tooth fragment reattachment techniques—a systematic review. Dent Traumatol 2018;34(3):135–143. DOI: 10.1111/edt.12392
Agarwal A, Manwar NU, Chandak MG. Reattachment of anterior teeth fragments with two different treatment techniques: report of two cases. Int J Dent Clin 2011;3(1):107–108.
Vâlceanu AS, Stratul SI. Multidisciplinary approach of complicated crown fractures of both superior central incisors: a case report. Dent Traumatol 2008;24(4):482–486. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2008.00572.x
Heda CB, Heda AA, Kulkarni SS. A multi-disciplinary approach in the management of a traumatized tooth with complicated crown-root fracture: a case report. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2006;24(4):197–200. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.28077
Manoj Kumar KR, Pradeep. Usage of different media for restoring tooth in tooth avulsion. IOSR-JDMS 2015;14(8):53–55. DOI: 10.9790/0853-14855355
Hiltz J, Trope M. Vitality of human lip fibroblasts in milk, Hanks balanced salt solution and Viaspan storage media. Endod Dent Traumatol 1991;7(2):69–72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1991.tb00187.x
Sunil Kumar C, Dharma Reddy K, Datta Prasad S, et al. Comparative evaluation of the effect of various storage media on the fracture resistance of reattached tooth fragments with flowable composite—an in vitro study. Int J Sci Res 2020;9(3):7–9. DOI: 10.36106/ijsr
Mittal R, Relhan N, Tangri T. Remineralizing agents: a comprehensive review. Int J Clin Prev Dent 2017;13(1):1–4. DOI: 10.15236/ijcpd.2017.13.1.1
Firouzmandi M, Afzali N, Parsaie Z, et al. Effect of casein phosphopeptide–amorphous calcium phosphate on fracture resistance of reattached tooth fragments using conventional and self-adhesive bioactive flowable composite. Eur J Dent 2020;14(2):288–293. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1710141
Holler BE, Friedl KH, Jung H, et al. Fluoride uptake and distribution in enamel and dentin after application of different fluoride solutions. Clin Oral Investig 2002;6(3):137–144. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-002-0164-5
Jo SY, Chong HJ, Lee EH, et al. Effects of various toothpastes on remineralization of white spot lesions. Korean J Orthod 2014;44(3):113–118. DOI: 10.4041/kjod.2014.44.3.113
Jayarajan J, Janardhanam P, Jayakumar P. Efficacy of CPP-ACP and CPP-ACPF on enamel remineralization—an in vitro study using scanning electron microscope and DIAGNOdent®. Indian J Dent Res 2011;22(1):77–82. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.80001
Kalra DD, Kalra RD, Kini PV, et al. Nonfluoride remineralization: an evidence-based review of contemporary technologies. J Dent Allied Sci 2014;3(1):24–33. DOI: 10.4103/2277-4696.156525
Haghgoo R, Abbasi F, Rezvani MB. Evaluation of the effect of nanohydroxyapatite on erosive lesions of the enamel of permanent teeth following exposure to soft beer in vitro. Sci Res Essays 2011;6(26):5933–5936. DOI: 10.5897/SRE11.1486
Pepla E, Besharat LK, Palaia G, et al. Nano-hydroxyapatite and its applications in preventive, restorative and regenerative dentistry: a review of literature. Ann Stomatol (Roma) 2014;5(3):108–114. PMID: 25506416.
Farik B, Munksgaard EC, Andreasen JO, et al. Drying and rewetting anterior crown fragments prior to bonding. Endod Dent Traumatol 1999;15(3):113–116. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1999.tb00766.x
Shirani F, Sakhaei Manesh V, Malekipour MR. Preservation of coronal tooth fragments prior to reattachment. Aus Dent J 2013;58(3):321–325. DOI: 10.1111/adj.12092
Kanca J 3rd. Resin bonding to wet substrate. 1. Bonding to dentin. Quintessence Int 1992;23(1):39–41. PMID: 1631269.
Elhabashy A, Swift EJ Jr. Bonding to etched, physiologically hydrated dentin. Am J Dent 1994;7(1):50–52. PMID: 9115682.
Vargas MA, Swift EJ Jr. Microleakage of resin composites with wet versus dry bonding. Am J Dent 1994;7(4):187–189. PMID: 7986432.
Perdigao J, Swift EJ, Cloe BC. Effects of etchants, surface moisture, and resin composite on dentin bond strengths. Am J Dent 1993;6(2): 61–64. PMID: 8397983.
Titley K, Chernecky R, Maric B, et al. Penetration of a dentin bonding agent into dentin. Am J Dent 1994;7(4):190–194. PMID: 7986433.
Yilmaz Y, Guler C, Sahin H, et al. Evaluation of tooth-fragment reattachment: a clinical and laboratory study. Dent Traumatol 2010;26:308–314. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2010.00907.x
Capp CI, Roda MI, Tamaki R, et al. Reattachment of rehydrated dental fragment using two techniques. Dent Traumatol 2009;25(1):95–99. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2008.00715.x