Fracture resistance of root filled molar teeth restored with glass fibre bundles

Rodrigues, F; Paranhos, Maria Paula Gandolfi; Spohr, Ana Maria; Oshima, Hugo Mitsuo Silva; Junior, Bruno Carlini; Burnett, Luis Henrique

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01666.x

Cited by 18 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is well established that endodontic treatment in MOD prepared maxillary premolars has a remarkable negative effect on the fracture resistance 3,4,5,6,9. This fact was confirmed by the results of the current study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…The loss of marginal ridges, the removal of pulp chamber roof along with inner dentin (axial walls) and the resultant cuspal deflection,1,3,4,5,6 along with the loss of the protective feedback mechanism in the non-vital teeth contribute to the high fracture susceptibility of the teeth 7. In particular, a high incidence of fracture in ET maxillary premolars has been reported due to the susceptibility of their anatomic form to separation, unfavorable crown/root proportion and their exposure to both shear and compressive forces 8,9…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored by silorane-based composite with or without fiber or nano-ionomer

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSEThis in vitro study investigated the fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars restored using silorane- or methacrylate-based composite along with or without fiber or nano-ionomer base.MATERIALS AND METHODSNinety-six intact maxillary premolars were randomly divided into eight groups (n = 12). G1 (negative control) was the intact teeth. In Groups 2-8, root canal treatment with mesio-occlusodistal preparation was performed. G2 (positive control) was kept unrestored. The other groups were restored using composite resin as follows: G3, methacrylate-based composite (Z250); G4, methacrylate composite (Z250) with polyethylene fiber; G5 and G6, silorane-based composite (Filtek P90) without and with the fiber, respectively; G7 and G8, methacrylate- and silorane-based composite with nano-ionomer base, respectively. After aging period and thermocycling for 1000 cycles, fracture strength was tested and fracture patterns were inspected. The results were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests (α=0.05).RESULTSMean fracture resistance for the eight groups (in Newton) were G1: 1200 ± 169a, G2: 360 ± 93b, G3: 632 ± 196c, G4: 692 ± 195c, G5: 917 ± 159d, G6: 1013 ± 125ad, G7: 959 ± 148d, G8: 947 ± 105d (different superscript letters revealed significant difference among groups). Most of the fractures in all the groups were restorable, except Group 3.CONCLUSIONSilorane-based composite revealed significantly higher strength of the restored premolars compared to that of methacrylate one. Fiber insertion demonstrated no additional effect on the strength of both composite restorations; however, it increased the prevalence of restorable fracture of methacrylate-based composite restored teeth. Using nano-ionomer base under methacrylate-based composite had a positive effect on fracture resistance and pattern. Only fiber-reinforced silorane composite restoration resulted in a strength similar to that of the intact teeth.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored by silorane-based composite with or without fiber or nano-ionomer

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors suggested that the polyethylene fibers had a stress-modifying effect along the restoration-dentin interface, and the bonding ability of fibers in combination with the resin might have increased the fracture strength of the tooth by keeping both cusps together. However, Rodrigues et al [21] concluded in a recent paper that fibers placed into MOD cavities did not reinforce teeth, but they may have a protective effect on fracture propagation towards the pulp chamber floor. These inconsistencies could be related to the different angle whereby the specimens were loaded.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The woven network allows fiber wetting and the infusion of the bonding resin; this enhances the transfer of forces acting on the PWT. Previous studies showed that this network changed the stress dynamics at the enamelcomposite material interface [19], but the effect on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth remains controversial [20,21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of fiber-glass-reinforced composite restorations on fracture resistance and failure mode of endodontically treated molars

Scotti

Forniglia

Tempesta

et al. 2016

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TObjectives: The study evaluated the fracture resistance and fracture patterns of endodontically treated mandibular first molars restored with glass-fiber-reinforced direct composite restorations. Methods: In total, 60 extracted intact first molars were treated endodontically; a mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavity was prepared and specimens were then divided into six groups: sound teeth (G1), no restoration (G2), direct composite restoration (G3), fiber-post-supported direct composite restoration (G4), direct composite reinforced with horizontal mesio-distal glass-fibers (G5), and buccal-palatal glassfibers (G6). Specimens were subjected to 5000 thermocycles and 20,000 cycles of 45 oblique loading force at 1.3 Hz and 50 N; they were then loaded until fracture. The maximum fracture loads were recorded in Newtons (N) and data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (p < 0.05). Fractured specimens were analyzed with a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Results: The mean static loads (in Newtons) were: G1, 831.83; G2, 282.86; G3, 364.18; G4, 502.93; G5, 499.26; and G6, 582.22. Fracture resistance did not differ among G4, G5, and G6, but was significantly higher than G3 (p = 0.001). All specimens fractured in a catastrophic way. In G6, glass fibers inducted a partial deflection of the fracture, although they were not able to stop crack propagation. Conclusions: For the direct restoration of endodontically treated molars, reinforcement of composite resins with glass-fibers or fiber posts can enhance fracture resistance. The SEM analysis showed a low ability of horizontal glass-fibers to deviate the fracture, but this effect was not sufficient to lead to more favorable fracture patterns above the cement-enamel junction (CEJ). Clinical significance: The fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with direct composite restorations seems to be increased by reinforcement with fibers, even if it is insufficient to restore sound molar fracture resistance and cannot avoid vertical fractures.

show abstract

“…5 The fracture potential of root canal filled teeth has been studied extensively, however, no definite causal relation ship between fracture and the type of restoration has been established, and controversies remain about which materials or techniques are best for their restoration. 6 In many situations, the remaining coronal tooth structure of endodontically treated teeth is insufficient to anchor coro nal restorations. 5 Therefore, endodontically treated teeth often require post-and-core restorations for retention purposes because of extensive structural defects resulting from caries and access cavity preparation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Different Ultrasonic Tip Angulations on Time Required for Cast Post Removal

Silva¹,

Cláudia²,

Xavier³

et al. 2014

World Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim of this study was to design, develop and compare ultrasound tips with different angulations on time required for cast post removal. Materials and methods:To test and compare the ultrasonic tips developed, 36 metal patterns were fabricated from tin bars, on a mechanical precision lathe. Each metal pattern simulated an endodontically treated tooth, without coronal remaining, prepared to receive a cast post with 10 mm long. The cast posts were cemented with zinc phosphate cement. The metal patterns with their respective intraradicular posts cemented were stored at 37ºC, at relative humidity 100%, for a period of 48 hours. After this period, the specimens were randomly divided into three groups, and each group was submitted to the action of one of the ultrasonic tips (n = 12): G1-tip with 30º angulation; G2-tip with 45º angulation and G3-tip without angulation (straight tip). Each ultrasonic tip was used on the surfaces of the cast posts (mesial, distal, buccal, lingual and incisal) for 5 seconds, at maximum power, until the cast post removal using an ultrasound device (Jet Sonic, Satelec System, Gnatus, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil). The time required for cast posts removal was recorded and the data statistically analyzed by the ANOVA and Tukey tests (p < 0.05). Results:The means of time evaluated for cast posts removal were G1: 59.25s; G2: 119.0s and G3: 48.4s. Group 2 presented the highest mean value in seconds, differing statistically from G1 and G3. No significant differences were observed between G1 and G3. Conclusion:It may be concluded that the ultrasonic tip angu lation had a direct influence on the time required for cast posts removal by ultrasound. When the different ultrasonic tips were compared, the 30° angulation and the straight tips required a shorter ultrasonic vibration time. All cast posts luted with zinc phosphate were successfully removed in a relatively short time by the different ultrasonic tips analyzed.

show abstract

Fracture resistance of root filled molar teeth restored with glass fibre bundles

Abstract: The insertion of glass fibres into MOD cavity preparations and restoring them with composite resin was not different than molar teeth filled with composite resin only in terms of fracture resistance. Fibres placed into MOD cavities do not reinforce teeth.

Cited by 18 publications

References 14 publications

Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored by silorane-based composite with or without fiber or nano-ionomer

Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored by silorane-based composite with or without fiber or nano-ionomer

Effects of fiber-glass-reinforced composite restorations on fracture resistance and failure mode of endodontically treated molars

Comparison of Different Ultrasonic Tip Angulations on Time Required for Cast Post Removal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About