The effect of retentive groove, sandblasting and cement type on the retentive strength of stainless steel crowns in primary second molars--an in vitro comparative study
- PMID: 22565513
- DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.95570
The effect of retentive groove, sandblasting and cement type on the retentive strength of stainless steel crowns in primary second molars--an in vitro comparative study
Abstract
Purpose: This in vitro study was conducted to find out the effect of retentive groove, sand blasting and cement type on the retentive strength of stainless steel crowns in primary second molars.
Materials and methods: Thirty-two extracted intact human maxillary and mandibular primary second molars were embedded in aluminum blocks utilizing autopolymerising acrylic resin. After tooth preparation, the 3M stainless steel crown was adjusted to the prepared tooth. Then weldable buccal tubes were welded on the buccal and lingual surfaces of each crown as an attachment for the testing machine. A full factorial design matrix for four factors (retentive groove placement on the tooth, cement type, sandblasting and primary second molar) at two levels each was developed and the study was conducted as dictated by the matrix. The lower and upper limits for each factor were without and with retentive groove placement on the tooth, GIC and RMGIC, without and with sandblasting of crown, maxillary and mandibular second primary molar. For those teeth for which the design matrix dictated groove placement, the retentive groove was placed on the middle third of the buccal surface of the tooth horizontally and for those crowns for which sandblasting of the crowns are to be done, sandblasting was done with aluminium oxide with a particle size of 250 mm. The crowns were luted with either GIC or RMGIC, as dictated by the design matrix. Then the retentive strength of each sample was evaluated by means of an universal testing machine. The obtained data was analyzed using ANOVA for statistical analysis of the data and 't'- tests for pairwise comparison.
Results: The mean retentive strength in kg/cm 2 stainless steel crowns luted with RMGIC was 19.361 and the mean retentive strength of stainless steel crowns luted with GIC was 15.964 kg/cm 2 with a mean difference of 3.397 kg/cm 2 and was statistically significant. The mean retentive strength in kg/cm 2 of stainless steel crowns, which was not sandblasted, was 18.880 and which was sandblasted was 16.445 kg/cm 2 with a mean difference of 2.436 kg/cm 2 . These results were again statistically significant.
Conclusion: It was found that the crowns luted with resin-modified glass ionomer cements (RMGIC's) offered better retentive strength of crowns than glass ionomer cements (GIC) and stainless steel crowns which were cemented without sandblasting showed higher mean retentive strength than with sandblasting of crowns. The presence of groove did not influence the retentive strength of stainless steel crowns.
Similar articles
-
Microleakage of adhesive and nonadhesive luting cements for stainless steel crowns.Pediatr Dent. 2011 Nov-Dec;33(7):501-4. Pediatr Dent. 2011. PMID: 22353410 Clinical Trial.
-
Effect of Sandblasting and Type of Cement on the Bond Strength of Molar Bands on Stainless Steel Crowns.J Dent Child (Chic). 2015 May-Aug;82(2):64-9. J Dent Child (Chic). 2015. PMID: 26349792
-
In Vitro Retentive Effect of Groove, Sandblasting, and Cement Type on Stainless Steel Crowns in Primary Molars.Pediatr Dent. 2015 Jul-Aug;37(4):339-41. Pediatr Dent. 2015. PMID: 26314600
-
Preformed posterior stainless steel crowns: an update.Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1999 Feb;20(2):89-92, 94-6, 98-100 passim; quiz 106. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1999. PMID: 11692330 Review.
-
In vitro Evaluation of Stainless Steel Crowns cemented with Resin-modified Glass Ionomer and Two New Self-adhesive Resin Cements.Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016 Jul-Sep;9(3):197-200. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1363. Epub 2016 Sep 27. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016. PMID: 27843249 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
In vitro comparison of microleakage with two different techniques of placing stainless steel crowns on mandibular deciduous first molar teeth with decreased mesiodistal width.J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2022 Winter;16(1):35-39. doi: 10.34172/joddd.2022.006. Epub 2022 May 29. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2022. PMID: 35936935 Free PMC article.
-
Bond strength and microleakage of different types of cements in stainless steel crown of primary molar teeth.Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2021 Jul 19;18:58. eCollection 2021. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2021. PMID: 34497693 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of tooth preparation on microleakage of stainless steel crowns placed on primary mandibular first molars with reduced mesiodistal dimension.J Dent (Tehran). 2015 Jan;12(1):18-24. J Dent (Tehran). 2015. PMID: 26005450 Free PMC article.
-
An auxiliary factor for increasing the retention of short abutments.Heliyon. 2019 Oct 21;5(10):e02674. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02674. eCollection 2019 Oct. Heliyon. 2019. PMID: 31687510 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of Auxiliary Features on Retention of Short Dental Crowns: An In-Vitro Analysis of Box and Groove Preparations.Med Sci Monit. 2024 Mar 6;30:e943401. doi: 10.12659/MSM.943401. Med Sci Monit. 2024. PMID: 38444156 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources