A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study

Chauhan, Parul; Garg, Ashima; Mittal, Ravi; Kumar, Hemashi

doi:10.4103/jcd.jcd_227_19

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 It is well-known that teeth with inadequate post endodontic restoration are more prone to fracture and coronal leakage, causing diffusion of oral fluids, bacteria, bacterial products, and possibly root canal treatment failure. 2 Irrigating solutions and intra canal medicaments used during chemico-mechanical preparation of root canal can alter collagen structure, which contributes to alteration of mechanical properties of dentin, resulting in fatigue crack propagation and hence increasing its susceptibility to vertical root fracture. 2 The concept of intraorifice barrier placement was first given by Roghanizad and Jones for prevention of microleakage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 Irrigating solutions and intra canal medicaments used during chemico-mechanical preparation of root canal can alter collagen structure, which contributes to alteration of mechanical properties of dentin, resulting in fatigue crack propagation and hence increasing its susceptibility to vertical root fracture. 2 The concept of intraorifice barrier placement was first given by Roghanizad and Jones for prevention of microleakage. 3 Roghanizad and Jones, in order to reduce leakage, first proposed replacement of 3-mm of gutta-percha with restorative material at the root canal orifice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A protocol for a comparative evaluation of the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth reinforced with Cention N, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and short fiber reinforced flowable composite as an intraorifice barrier

Jidewar,

Chandak

2024

F1000Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Endodontic treatment is the most common method for resolving pulpal and periapical pathology. However, various studies have reported that almost 11%–13% of all teeth that undergo extraction after endodontic treatment show the presence of cracks, craze lines, and vertical root fractures. Teeth with inadequate post endodontic restoration are more prone to fracture and coronal leakage, resulting in the diffusion of oral fluids, bacteria, bacterial products, and possibly root canal treatment failure. Furthermore, studies have advocated the use of endodontically treated teeth with restorative materials that have a similar or higher elastic modulus than the tooth for providing stiffness against forces that cause root fracture. Intraorifice barriers made of restorative materials that can bond to radicular dentin could thus be used to reinforce the radicular dentin while also preventing coronal microleakage. Although the sealing ability of intraorifice barriers has been widely compared in the literature, there have been few studies on the strengthening effect of the materials used in the study as intraorifice barriers when placed into the root canal. As a result, the current in vitro study aims to assess the effect of various materials as intraorifice barriers (Cention N, Resin modified glass ionomer cement, and short fiber reinforced flowable composite) on the force required fracture teeth after root canal treatment. Methods: This in vitro study will be done on extracted human mandibular premolars with single root canal where after doing root canal treatment 2-3 mm obturating material would be replaced by intra orifice barriers (Cention N, resin modified glass ionomer cement [RMGIC], and short fiber reinforced flowable composite). The force required to fracture teeth will be calculated using universal testing machine.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A protocol for a comparative evaluation of the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth reinforced with Cention N, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and short fiber reinforced flowable composite as an intraorifice barrier

Jidewar,

Chandak

2024

F1000Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No significant data are reported about complications due to the perforation of the maxillary sinus by OMs insertion [ 18 ]. On the other hand, tooth root injuries are reported as the most frequent complications of OMs [ 19 , 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tooth Complications after Orthodontic Miniscrews Insertion

Inchingolo

Malcangi

Costa

et al. 2023

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Orthodontic miniscrews (OM) are widely used in modern orthodontic clinical practice to improve skeletal anchorage and have a high safety profile. A complication at the time of OM insertion is tooth root perforation or periodontal ligament trauma. Rarely, OM injury can cause permanent damage, such as ankylosis, osteosclerosis, and loss of tooth vitality. The aim of this work was to analyze potential risks and dental complications associated with the use of OMs. A search of the PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus databases was conducted without a time limit using the keywords “orthodontic mini-screw” and “dental damage”, resulting in 99 studies. After screening and eligibility, including articles obtained through a citation search, 13 articles were selected. Four studies revealed accidental injuries caused by OM. Most of the damage was localized at the root level and resolved spontaneously with restorative cement formation after prompt removal of the OM, while the pain disappeared. In some cases, irreversible nerve damage, extensive lesions to the dentin–pulp complex, and refractory periapical periodontitis occurred, requiring endodontic and/or surgical treatment. The choice of insertion site was the most important element to be evaluated during the application of OMs.

show abstract

“…MTA is now successfully used in endodontics as direct pulp capping, pulpotomy, apexification, repair of root perforation and regenerative endodontic procedures, owing to its sealing ability, antibacterial activity, biocompatibility, osteo-inductive potential and its ability to bond to the tooth structure, thus providing a monobloc effect [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]. Its use has further expanded as an obturation material in certain demanding situations and as an intra-orifice barrier above the gutta percha to improve the coronal seal [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Various Acid Solutions as an Aid in Removing the OrthoMTA-Based Root Canal Filling

Chhabra

Parolia

2023

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objectives of this study were to compare the effects of various acid solutions combined with ultrasonics as an aid to remove mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)-based root canal filling and to assess their effect on the surface topography and microhardness of root canal dentin. Materials and Method: Fifty human permanent single rooted and single canaled freshly extracted teeth were decoronated and sectioned apically to prepare the middle third of root sections of 5 mm length. The canals were prepared in a step-back manner. OrthoMTA was packed throughout the prepared canals. These root sections were incubated for one week and subsequently randomly allocated to five groups (n = 10) according to the OrthoMTA removal method: No treatment (NT); 5% glycolic acid + ultrasonics (5% GA+U); 10% glycolic acid + ultrasonics (10% GA+U); 10% citric acid + ultrasonics (10% CA+U); Distilled water + ultrasonics (DW+U). A 1 mm deep well was created within the coronal end of the set OrthoMTA. Wells were filled with each respective test solution and left for 5 min. Thereafter, further removal of OrthoMTA used a specific ultrasonic tip. Finally, the canals were flushed using 1 mL of the respective test solutions and activated with a Controlled Memory ultrasonic tip for two cycles of 20 s each followed by flushing with 1 mL of distilled water and paper point drying of the canals. Then, specimens were longitudinally split into two halves and examined under a scanning electron microscope (1000×) to assess the residual OrthoMTA and surface topography of root canal dentin. The Vickers surface microhardness of treated radicular dentin was measured using the HMV-2 microhardness tester. Result: Data were analysed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post hoc test. Significant differences for residual OrthoMTA were observed between (10% GA+U) with (5% GA+U), (10% CA+U), (DW+U) and (NT) (p value < 0.01). In the context of microhardness, (5% GA+U) and (10% GA+U) showed statistically significant difference compared to (NT), (10% CA+U) and (DW+U) (p value < 0.01). Conclusion: 10% GA+U was superior to other tested groups in removing OrthoMTA, but it substantially reduced dentin microhardness.

show abstract

A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study

Cited by 11 publications

References 16 publications

A protocol for a comparative evaluation of the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth reinforced with Cention N, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and short fiber reinforced flowable composite as an intraorifice barrier

A protocol for a comparative evaluation of the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth reinforced with Cention N, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and short fiber reinforced flowable composite as an intraorifice barrier

Tooth Complications after Orthodontic Miniscrews Insertion

Effect of Various Acid Solutions as an Aid in Removing the OrthoMTA-Based Root Canal Filling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About