An in vitro comparison of two dowel and core techniques for endodontically treated molars

Kern, Stephen B.; Fraunhofer, J.A. von; Mueninghoff, Leonard A.

doi:10.1016/0022-3913(84)90303-2

Cited by 37 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…23 Therefore, this study attempted to conform to recommendations from previously acknowledged publications wherever feasible. Previous studies measuring fracture resistance have used 5 to 10 teeth in each group; [10][11]13,[23][24][25] however, in the current study, 15 teeth were used in each group, because of the potential variability introduced by tooth anatomy, core geometry and surface finish.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12 However, conflicting results, published by Kern and others, revealed that corono-radicular restorations had significantly lower mean fracture loads compared to postretained amalgam cores when used as a core for a cast crown. 13 The strength of core materials is an important feature that has received much attention. A core is usually required to replace a large bulk of tooth structure and, therefore, must resist multidirectional masticatory forces for many years.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Study of the Fracture Resistance of Nyyar Cores of Three Restorative Materials

Ferrier¹,

Sekhon²,

Brunton³

2008

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

©Operative Dentistry, 2008, 33-3, 305-311 Clinical RelevanceThe fracture resistance of resin-modified glass ionomer cements merits consideration of their use as core materials for root-filled premolars. S Ferrier • BS Sekhon • PA Brunton SUMMARYDespite the successful use of dental amalgam for coronal-radicular dowel and core build-up in endodontically-treated posterior teeth, newer materials offer many potential advantages over amalgam and have better patient acceptance. This study compared the fracture resistance of coronal-radicular restorations made from three different direct restorative materials. Sixty human premolars were selected, 45 of which were root treated and decoronated. Fifteen of these premolars were restored using amalgam, 15 with composite and 15 using resin-modified glass ionomer. The 15 unrestored teeth were used as a control group. All the teeth were mounted in acrylic within steel containers and subjected to compressive loading to failure on a universal testing machine. The force required to fracture each core specimen was recorded as well as the proportion of core lost due to failure. The results showed dental amalgam as having the highest fracture resistance (mean 1.93kN, sd 0.22) followed by resin-modified glass ionomer (mean 1.05kN, sd 0.20), sound tooth (mean 0.79kN, sd 0.20) and composite (mean 0.75kN, sd 0.11). The differences among all groups were significant. These results demonstrate that, although resin-modified glass ionomer is significantly weaker than amalgam, these restorations were stronger than unrestored teeth and failed at forces in excess of those encountered in normal mastication. Amalgam cores, along with resin-modified glass ionomer, tended to fail less catastrophically than the other materials and, given their strength, would remain the material of choice in situations where abnormally high forces are expected.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study of the Fracture Resistance of Nyyar Cores of Three Restorative Materials

Ferrier¹,

Sekhon²,

Brunton³

2008

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Amalgam restorations are used for endodontically treated posterior teeth either as a final cusp-protecting restoration (Gordon etal, 1984;Brown, Barkmeier & Anderson, 1979) or as a core supporting a cast restoration (Kern, von Fraunhofer & Mueninghoff, 1984;Johnson, Schwartz & Blackweil, 1976).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance to horizontal forces of dowel and amalgam‐core restorations: a comparative study

Gordon

Metzger

1987

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four designs of amalgam-core anchorage were compared in a laboratory study for the inability to withstand the horizontal component of occlusal force. Amalgam cores were constructed for extracted teeth with either composite resin-cemented Dentatus dowels, or with Para-post or Flexi-post dowels cemented with phosphate cement. All the posts were of comparable length and diameter. These anchorage designs were compared with each other and to a self-threading (TMS) pin-retained amalgam core, by application of horizontal force and recording forces causing failure. Flexi-post-retained amalgam cores failed at a mean force of 36.5 (+/- 8.5) kg while Dentatus-retained and Para-post-retained cores failed at 41.7 (+/- 8.0) kg and 46.6 (+/- 11.4) kg, respectively. TMS-retained cores resisted forces up to a mean force of 53.5 (+/- 4.5) kg. Patterns of failure varied widely among these groups. Composite resin-cemented Dentatus dowels were retained in the tooth in nine out of ten samples, while none of the ten Flexi-post dowels and only one of the ten Para-post dowels did so. Tooth fracture on failure occurred in seven out of ten Flexi-post-retained cores, while only three out of ten of the Para-post-retained cores and none of the Dentatus dowel-retained cores presented this unrepairable type of failure. Possible reasons for these differences are discussed.

show abstract

“…Atualmente, o pino pré-fabricado tem se tornado mais popular na prática clínica do que os pinos metálicos fundidos devido à facilidade da técnica e menor tempo de trabalho necessário (De Sort, 1983;Kern et al, 1984;Chan et al, 1993;Eskitascioglu et al, 2002;Figueiredo et al, 2015). O presente estudo comparou um modelo customizado de pino pré-fabricado com o modelo convencional, ambos construídos em dois tipos de materiais (metal e fibra de vidro).…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Pelo seu método de fabricação, o núcleo metálico fundido necessita de maior tempo clínico e extra-clínico (laboratorial) para sua construção. O pino pré-fabricado, por outro lado, permite uma técnica mais fácil, barata e rápida, porém não reproduz a anatomia interna do canal e muitas vezes sua adaptação não é totalmente ideal (De Sort, 1983;Kern et al, 1984;Chan et al, 1993;Eskitascioglu et al, 2002). Atualmente, o pino pré-fabricado em fibra de vidro tem se tornado mais popular na prática clínica do que os pinos metálicos fundidos devido à sua melhor reprodução estética e menor tempo de trabalho necessário (Figueiredo et al, 2015).…”

Section: Dois Tipos De Retentores São Comumente Estudados Na Literatuunclassified

Comparação da eficiência na distribuição de tensões de diferentes modelos de retentores intrarradiculares: uma análise de elementos finitos tridimensional

Mayer-Santos¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An in vitro comparison of two dowel and core techniques for endodontically treated molars

Cited by 37 publications

References 10 publications

A Study of the Fracture Resistance of Nyyar Cores of Three Restorative Materials

A Study of the Fracture Resistance of Nyyar Cores of Three Restorative Materials

Resistance to horizontal forces of dowel and amalgam‐core restorations: a comparative study

Comparação da eficiência na distribuição de tensões de diferentes modelos de retentores intrarradiculares: uma análise de elementos finitos tridimensional

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About