Survival analysis of adhesive reattachments in permanent teeth with crown fractures after dental trauma

Treatment Modalities of Uncomplicated Crown Fracture in Anterior Maxillary Permanent Teeth: A Systematic Review

AIM

Several treatment modalities have been used to restore crown fractures in case of uncomplicated crown fractures. Although many treatment modalities have been reported, there is no consensus on which one has the best results in terms of success and durability. This systematic review of treatment modalities in uncomplicated crown fractures aims to provide the most common and successful treatment modality for each patient's unique needs, balancing conservation, aesthetics, and long-term durability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar) were searched for articles regarding treatment modalities in uncomplicated crown fractures in anterior maxillary teeth.

RESULTS

Following the application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 10 case reports, four case series, and two retrospective studies were selected for the review. These studies reported on fragment reattachment, direct composite resin, and veneers for the management of uncomplicated crown fractures. Fragment reattachment was the most preferred treatment modality, with milk, water, or sterile saline used as storage mediums. Direct composite restoration was preferred for missing or bad-shaped fragments or longevity. Veneers were given for aesthetic consideration and fracture resistance when the crown structure was majorly affected by the fracture. Fragment reattachment was favored in 63% of the articles included in the review followed by direct composite restoration in 26% of the articles. Venners were used in about 11% of the articles. Composites depicted a higher survival rate and a better outcome than fragment reattachment. Follow-up periods ranged from 1 week to 4 years, and all articles successfully re-established function and aesthetics, except for one tooth that required root canal treatment.

CONCLUSION

Fragment reattachment, direct composite restoration, and veneers are successful treatment modalities in uncomplicated crown fractures of anterior teeth. The choice of treatment depends on various factors like availability of fragments, age, and financial condition of the patient.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42020153091.

The risk of bonded fragment loss in crown-fractured anterior teeth managed by fragment reattachment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To identify the factors affecting the risk of bonded fragment loss in crown-fractured anterior teeth managed by fragment reattachment.

METHODS

The study protocol followed the best practices of evidence-based medicine and was registered in PROSPERO. A comprehensive literature search was performed electronically in six databases (PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Web-of-Science, Lilacs, and Cochrane) on 18-09-2023. It was saved in EndNote-online and duplicates were removed. Selection of articles was performed in two stages, followed by data-extraction, risk of bias assessment, data-analysis, and meta-analysis. The quality of evidence for the outcomes was assessed by the GRADE-approach.

RESULTS

The study included six articles that had similar selection protocols with variations in duration from trauma to treatment and the observation period. Only one study employed pre-attachment fragment preparation and three performed post-attachment reinforcements. Overall loss of fragment was 20% (95%CI-13,30%). When the risk ratio for loss of restoration or fragment was compared, it was found to be 2.21 (95%CI-1.52,3.21) in uncomplicated crown fractures, 2.54 (95%CI-1.35,4.79) in complicated crown fractures. The risk of bias was found to be low in two and moderate in four studies. Grade of evidence for all the outcomes was very low.

CONCLUSION

Fragment loss was lowest in uncomplicated crown fractures where reinforcement had been performed, and highest when bonding was done in complicated crown fractures without reinforcement. The risk of fragment loss was higher than the loss of composite restorations.

Comparing fracture resistance on bovine incisors restored by tooth fragment reattachment versus direct composite restoration techniques

BACKGROUND/AIM

Anterior teeth are prone to traumatic dental injuries (TDIs). Although a number of techniques ranging from original tooth fragment reattachment (TFR) to direct composite restoration (DCR) can be used to restore uncomplicated crown fractures, there is no consensus on which method is best. The purpose of this study was to investigate the fracture resistance of bovine incisors restored by two different techniques (TFR and DCR) in three different fracture models.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty extracted bovine lower incisors were randomly divided into three groups (n = 20). Angle, oblique, or transverse sections of all the teeth in a group were prepared by using a disk. The cut surfaces were scanned, and the cross-sectional areas (CSA) of the enamel and dentin were measured. Half the teeth in each group were restored by DCR (n = 10) and the other half by TFR (n = 10). The forces required to fracture the restored teeth were then measured using a Universal testing machine, and the fracture modes were analyzed (cohesive, adhesive, or mixed).

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences between the TFR and DCR restorations were detected for total and enamel CSAs in any of the restoration shapes (p > .067). The fracture forces required to break DCR angle and transverse restorations were significantly greater than for the corresponding shapes restored with TFR (p < .033). However, the difference in the forces needed to fracture oblique section restorations by DCR or TFR was not statistically significant (p = .239), despite a similar trend (143.4 ± 51 N and 120.9 ± 25 N, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that a greater force is required to fracture teeth restored by the DCR than by the TFR technique, especially for a transverse section. This demonstrates that restoring a fractured tooth provides a superior outcome compared to reattaching the fractured fragment.

Survival analysis of fragment reattachments and direct composite restorations in permanent teeth after dental traumatic injuries

BACKGROUND/AIM

In case of crown fractures after traumatic dental injuries, the affected teeth can be restored either with reattachment of the fractured fragment or with a direct composite restoration. So far, longevity data for reattachments and direct composite restorations with regard to different failure types (pulp necrosis and infection, restoration loss) are scarce. Therefore, the aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the restorative and biological survival of reattached fragments and composite restorations after crown fractures in permanent teeth.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Dental records of patients treated between 2000 and 2018 were retrospectively analysed regarding the restoration (reattachment or direct composite restorations) of teeth with crown fractures. Survival (no further intervention) and restorative and/or biological failure of all restored teeth were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier statistics, and the mean annual failure rates for two and 5 years were calculated. Furthermore, the effect of potential risk factors on survival was assessed. Log-rank tests and univariate Cox regression models (likelihood ratio tests) were used to assess the univariate effect of all variables of interest. Variables with a p-value ≤.10 were included in a multivariate Cox regression model with shared frailty (p < .05).

RESULTS

Overall, 164 patients with 235 teeth (uncomplicated crown fracture: N = 201, complicated crown fracture: N = 34) were included (1.6 ± 2.5 years observation time). Of these, 59 teeth were restored with reattachment of the fragment and 176 with a composite restoration. Overall, composite restorations had a significantly higher survival rate than reattachments (p = .002). The cumulative survival after 2 years was 42.9% and 65.0% for teeth treated with a reattachment (mAFR = 34.5%) and a composite restoration (mAFR = 19.3%), respectively. When differentiating between failure types, restoration failure and pulp necrosis were significantly more frequently detected in reattached crown fractures compared to composite restorations (restorative failure: p = .001; biological failure: p = .036). In the multivariate Cox regression model, the variable jaw and luxation significantly influenced the survival when the tooth was restored with a composite restoration. The survival was not influenced by the fracture type.

CONCLUSIONS

Restorative and biological failures were more frequently detected when the tooth was restored with a reattached fragment compared to a direct composite restoration. Both, restoration failure and pulp necrosis with infection should be considered as frequent complications after restoration of crown-fractured teeth which emphasizes the necessity of regular and short follow-up intervals throughout the first 2 years.

Complicated Crown Fracture of Permanent Incisors: A Conservative Treatment Case Report and a Narrative Review

Dental trauma may have a severe impact on the social and psychological wellbeing of a patient. Most cases of dental injuries involve anterior teeth, especially the maxillary upper incisors. Crown fractures, with or without pulp exposure, are the most common trauma in permanent dentition. There are many methods of management, in which the initial state of the pulp, the time since the injury, and the presence of an accompanying injury play a key role. This case report aimed at showing a possible conservative treatment after complicated tooth fracture that consisted of partial pulpotomy followed by adhesive reattachment of the tooth fragment using a technique based on heated resin composite. Such a specific procedure represents a conservative approach to traumatic coronal lesions, providing a suitable opportunity to maintain the tooth vitality, aesthetics, and function. Indeed, reattachment of tooth fragment using a composite/adhesive is a simple technique to achieve excellent results in terms of aesthetic and function.

Conservative Treatment of Complicated Crown Fracture and Crown-Root Fracture of Young Permanent Incisor-A Case Report with 24-Month Follow-Up

The complicated crown-root fracture of young permanent teeth is an uncommon traumatic dental injury that is usually treated in a complex way and is demanding not only for the dentist but even for the treated child. In this case report, we present the conservative treatment of a maxillary central incisor in a 10-year-old boy after a traumatic dental injury. Treatment included partial pulpotomy and adhesive fragment reattachment after reflection of the mucoperiosteal flap. The patient was fully asymptomatic at 24-month follow-up, with an aesthetically acceptable outcome. Vital pulp therapy and adhesive fragment reattachment can be a viable treatment option for complicated crown-root fractures, especially when treating immature permanent teeth.