Comparison of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using different coronal restorative materials: An<i>in vitro</i>study

Monga, Prashant; Sharma, Vivek; Kumar, Sukesh

doi:10.4103/0972-0707.58338

Cited by 53 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bonded composite restorations can be considered as the first choice for coronal restorations as they play a vital role in increasing the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. [ 4 ] Furthermore, it has been shown that direct and indirect cusp coverage adhesive restorations can significantly increase the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. [ 5 ] Bonding endodontic obturation materials to radicular dentin is another approach to increase fracture resistance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anin vitrocomparative evaluation of different intraorifice barriers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated roots obturated with gutta-percha

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:To compare and evaluate the root reinforcement potential of four different intraorifice barriers: Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), fiber-reinforced composite (FRC), and nanohybrid composite (NC).Materials and Methods:Seventy-five mandibular premolars were decoronated to a standardized length, and prepared and obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. Except for control specimens, the coronal 3-mm gutta-percha was removed and filled with different materials. The specimens (75) were divided into five groups (n = 15) on the basis of the intraorifice barrier material used. Group 1: MTA, Group 2: RMGIC, Group 3: FRC, Group 4: NC, Group 5: no barrier (control). Fracture resistance of the specimens was tested.Results:Fracture resistance of roots was significantly affected by the type of intraorifice barrier used and the following pattern was observed: RMGIC > FRC > NC > MTA.Conclusion:Intraorifice barriers can be regarded as a viable choice to reduce the occurrence of postendodontic root fractures. Among the four tested materials, RMGIC showed the maximum reinforcement.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anin vitrocomparative evaluation of different intraorifice barriers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated roots obturated with gutta-percha

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Due to their low elastic modulus, composite resins can transmit stresses produced by compressive forces to adjacent dental tissues, thus reinforcing weakened tooth structure. [ 17 ] In the present study, Nanohybrid composite was used, which has high filler content, which improves its mechanical properties. Results are similar to the study by Aboobaker et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Chauhan¹,

Garg²,

Mittal³

et al. 2019

J Conserv Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four intraorifice barriers. Materials and Methods: Fifty extracted single-rooted mandibular premolars were selected, decoronated, and prepared with rotary Protaper universal system and obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. Samples were divided into five groups ( n = 10) on the basis of intraorifice barrier material used. Group 1: Biodentine, Group 2: Conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC), Group 3: Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), Group 4: Nanohybrid composite, Group 5: No barrier (control).Except for control specimens, coronal 3-mm gutta-percha was removed and filled with different intraorifice barrier materials in respective groups. Fracture resistance of specimens was tested using universal testing machine. Statistical Analysis Used: One-way analysis of variance test and Post hoc Tukey's test. Results: Mean fracture resistance of all experimental groups (with intraorifice barriers placed) were higher than control group (no intraorifice barrier placed). Biodentine showed the highest mean fracture resistance while RMGIC showed the least and the difference between their mean fracture resistance was statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference among other experimental groups. Conclusion: Placement of intraorifice barriers in endodontically treated teeth can significantly increase fracture resistance and this increase in fracture resistance is material dependent.

show abstract

“…Undoubtedly, this approach is invasive and will results in removal of large amounts of sound tooth structure. Composite resin has been chosen as one of the direct permanent restorations for endodontically treated teeth due to the fact that it performed better in term of fracture resistance and is able to reinforce weakened tooth structure ( 3 , 7 ). Besides, current adhesive technology also fulfilled the goal of conserving remaining tooth structure and reducing the amount of intervention needed ( 8 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture strength of endodontically treated lateral incisors restored with new zirconia reinforced rice husk nanohybrid composite

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study aimed to compare the fracture strength, fracture pattern and type of fracture of endodontically treated maxillary lateral incisors restored with new zirconia reinforced rice husk nanohybrid composite. Material and Methods Eighty mature permanent maxillary lateral incisors from patients age range of 30-60 years with single canal were selected and randomly divided into: Group 1 – RCT + nanofilled composite (Filtek), Group 2 – RCT + microhybrid composite (Zmack), Group 3 – RCT + new nanohybrid composite (Zr-Hybrid) and Group 4 - Intact teeth (control). Standardized mesio-palatal-distal cavity was prepared, and endodontic treatment was carried out using crown-down technique until size 30, tapered 0.04. Obturation was completed using single cone technique with gutta-percha and AH plus sealer. Cavity access was restored with respective composite resins. Next, teeth were stored in incubator for 24 hours and subdivided into aged and unaged subgroups. Teeth in aged subgroups were subjected to 2500 thermal cycles for 5ºC, 37ºC and 55ºC with 30 seconds dwell time and 5 seconds transfer time. After that, root surfaces of teeth were covered with silicone-based material and placed in boxes filled with acrylic until the cemento-enamel-junction (CEJ) level. They were then tested under Universal Testing Machine until fracture occurred. Samples were then viewed under Leica microscope to determine the fracture pattern and type of fracture. Data analyzed using One-way ANOVA complimented by post hoc Tukey HSD and paired sample T test for fracture strength. Fracture pattern and type of fracture were analyzed using Chi-square test. Level of significance was set at p <0.05. Results Significant differences were observed ( p <0.05) with Group 3 demonstrating the highest fracture strength followed by Group 4, Group 1 and lastly Group 2 in both aged and unaged subgroups respectively. A significant decreased in fracture strength was noted in Group 1 and Group 2 ( p <0.05) as number of thermocycle increased but no significant differences were noted in Group 3 and Group 4 ( p >0.05). Besides, Group 3 and Group 4 showed higher rate of favorable fracture pattern, followed by Group 1 and lastly Group 2. Most favorable fracture pattern was noted to exhibit horizontal fracture type (86.36%), whereas most unfavorable fracture pattern exhibited vertical fracture type (77.78%). Conclusions Endodontically treated teeth restored with new zirconia reinforced rice husk nanohybrid composite (Zr-Hybrid) demonstrated higher fracture strength than commercialized composite resins especially after artificial ageing. Zr-Hybrid showed similar fracture pattern to those of intact teeth with higher rate of horizontal fracture type. Key words: Fracture strength, fracture pattern, composite resin, rice husk, Z...

show abstract

Comparison of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using different coronal restorative materials: Anin vitrostudy

Cited by 53 publications

References 20 publications

Anin vitrocomparative evaluation of different intraorifice barriers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated roots obturated with gutta-percha

Anin vitrocomparative evaluation of different intraorifice barriers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated roots obturated with gutta-percha

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

Fracture strength of endodontically treated lateral incisors restored with new zirconia reinforced rice husk nanohybrid composite

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About