Effect of fiber posts on the fracture resistance of maxillary central incisors with Class III restorations: An in vitro study

Abduljawad, Mohammed; Samran, Abdulaziz; Kadour, Jadalkareem; Karzoun, Wassim; Kern, Matthias

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.09.013

Cited by 20 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present study shows that the GFP does not interfere with the fracture strength of teeth with crowns weakened by Class III restorations on the proximal surfaces. These data corroborate previous studies (VALDIVIA et al, 2012;ABDULJAWAD et al, 2017;STEIN-LAUSNITZ et al, 2019). The results of the present study allow suggest that when an anterior tooth element presents Class III restorations, the use of GFP is not required to retain the restoration, similar to that stated by Lima et al (2010).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Influence of glass fiber posts and class III direct restorations on the resistance of anterior teeth

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study objectives to evaluate the fracture strength of upper central incisors (UCI) restored with composite resin (CR) in Class III cavities and endodontically treated teeth with or without glass fiber post (GFP), analyzing their failure mode. Sixty human UCI were randomly divided into four experimental groups: endodontically treated teeth without GFP (G1), endodontically treated teeth with GFP (G2), teeth with mesial/distal Class III cavities restored with CR without GFP (G3), and teeth with mesial/distal Class III cavities restored with CR with GFP (G4). The samples were submitted to the fracture strength test in a universal testing machine with a compression shear load applied at speed of 1.0 mm/min until fracture occurred. The data were submitted to one-way ANOVA (α=0.05) and the samples were analyzed for failure mode. The analysis did not show a significant statistical difference in fracture strength between the groups (p>0.05). The results showed that only endodontically treated teeth (G1) (753.4N) presented behavior similar to teeth with GFP (G2) (702.1N). The same occurred when comparing teeth with Class III cavities without GFP (G3) (670.2 N) and with GFP (G4) (746.1N). It can be concluded that glass fiber posts do not change the fracture strength of incisors with endodontic treatment and Class III cavities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Influence of glass fiber posts and class III direct restorations on the resistance of anterior teeth

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As demonstrated by Newman et al [47], fiber-supported composite appears to dissipate forces along the root canal system, reducing peak stresses on the root and therefore moving the critical fracture point coronally, ultimately leading to repairable fractures [48,49]. On the other hand, rigid posts such as carbon fiber or cast posts and core seem to be more prone to cause nonrepairable root fractures due to their elastic modulus [50].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Could different direct restoration techniques affect interfacial gap and fracture resistance of endodontically treated anterior teeth?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To evaluate different direct restoration techniques on various cavity designs in anterior endodontically treated teeth (ETT). Materials and methods Ninety upper central incisors (n = 90) were selected, endodontically treated, and divided into three groups (n = 30) accordingly to the cavity design: minimal endodontic cavity access (group A), endodontic access + mesial class III cavity (group B), and endodontic access + two class III cavities (group C). Three subgroups (n = 10) were then created accordingly to the restoration technique: nano hybrid composite restoration (subgroup a), glass fiber post + dual-cure luting cement (subgroup b), and bundled glass fiber + dual-cure luting cement (subgroup c). Samples underwent micro-CT scan, chewing simulation, and a second micro-CT scan. 3D quantification (mm3) of interfacial gap progression was performed; then, samples underwent fracture resistance test. Data were statistically analyzed setting significance at p < 0.05. Results Groups A and B showed significantly lower interfacial gap progression compared with group C. Subgroup b performed significantly better compared with subgroups a and c. Improved fracture strength was reported for group C compared with group A, while both subgroups b and c performed better than subgroup a. Conclusions Cavity design significantly influenced interfacial gap progression and fracture resistance. Fiber posts significantly lowered gap progression and improved fracture resistance while bundled fibers only increased fracture resistance. A significant reduction of non-repairable fractures was recorded when fibers were applied. Clinical relevance A minimally invasive approach, conserving marginal crests, should be applied whenever possible. Inserting a fiber post is indicated when restoring anterior ETT, in order to reduce gap progression, improve fracture resistance, and avoid catastrophic failures.

show abstract

“…In fact, some authors (20) showed that small cavities did not interfere with shaping effectiveness and with the biomechanical characteristics of endodontically treated teeth; others (14) found substantial differences in root canal shaping of teeth with different sizes of access cavity design. The embedding of teeth was performed with the use of an acrylic self-curing resin according to previous studies (6,20), other studies (27)(28)(29) used in addition a cushion material to simulate periodontal ligament and tooth mobility and also to amortize the load.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Endodontic Access Cavity Design on Fracture Strength of Maxillary Incisors and Premolars and on Fatigue Resistance of Reciprocating Instruments

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of two different access cavity designs on fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth and on cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc blue instruments. Methods: Forty (40) maxillary central incisor teeth and forty (40) upper first premolars were selected and divided into 4 groups (n = 20/group): Group 1A, incisors prepared with conservative access cavity (CEC); group 1B, incisors prepared with traditional access cavity (TEC); group 2A, premolars prepared with CEC; group 2B, premolars prepared with TEC. After access cavity preparation, all teeth were endodontically treated, restored, and then loaded to fracture. A total of 80 Reciproc blue R25 files were used for root canal shaping and then tested for cyclic fatigue. Normality of data distribution was evaluated by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Data were statistically analyzed by Independent T-test and the significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results: No statistically significant differences in fracture strength were found between the two tested access cavities both for incisors (P = 0.70) and premolars (0.422). Cyclic fatigue resistance of Reciproc blue R25 was significantly reduced in endodontically treated teeth with CEC (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Within the limits of the present in vitro study, CEC does not increase fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth in comparison to TEC. Conservative Endodontic Cavity causes more cyclic fatigue of Reciproc blue R25 than Traditional Endodontic Cavity.

show abstract

Effect of fiber posts on the fracture resistance of maxillary central incisors with Class III restorations: An in vitro study

Cited by 20 publications

References 29 publications

Influence of glass fiber posts and class III direct restorations on the resistance of anterior teeth

Influence of glass fiber posts and class III direct restorations on the resistance of anterior teeth

Could different direct restoration techniques affect interfacial gap and fracture resistance of endodontically treated anterior teeth?

Influence of Endodontic Access Cavity Design on Fracture Strength of Maxillary Incisors and Premolars and on Fatigue Resistance of Reciprocating Instruments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About