Fracture strength of teeth with access cavity preparation with operating microscope or on buccal surfaces

Abstract

Objective: The present study assessed the fracture strength of teeth subjected to endodontic access cavity preparation on buccal surfaces, or with the aid of operating microscopy when compared to the conventional technique. Material and methods: Sixty mandibular incisors were split into four groups (n=15): conventional access cavity preparation (CCP); conservative (C); buccal surface (BS); and control. The canals were prepared and filled and the cavities were restored. A static compressive strength test was conducted until crown fracture. The force data were compiled and assessed statistically. Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests were performed to assess normality, Levene’s test to assess variance homogeneity, the one-way ANOVA to compare fracture strength in the assessed groups. Tukey’s HSD test was used to determine whether the differences in the means were significant between the groups.Results: The experimental groups did not show any statistically significant differences in mean fracture strength (CCP = 585.65 N±107.64 N)(BS = 530.52 N±129.35 N) (C = 517.83 N±114.68 N). Conclusion: Therefore, the selection of surface or size of access cavity proposed did not influence the fracture strength of mandibular incisors when compared to conventional cavity preparation. KeywordsDental pulp cavity; Dental stress analysis; Root canal therapy.

Influence of minimally invasive access cavities on load capacity of root‐canal‐treated teeth: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Importantly, only 20 articles could be included in the meta‐analysis. Four [5, 15, 30, 31] of five excluded studies were not similar enough to any other studies to justify their inclusion in the analyses. In the other excluded study [17], teeth were not restored after the root canal therapy procedure.…”

“…Importantly, only 20 articles could be included in the meta-analysis. Four [5,15,30,31] of five excluded studies were not similar enough to any other studies to justify their inclusion in the analyses.…”

“…However, with the advent of modern endodontic instruments, Clark and Khademi proposed a substantially more conservative endodontic access in 2010 [13]. This novel approach to endodontic access preparation led to the introduction of different access forms designed to preserve sound tooth structure [2,3,14,15].…”

“…Although various studies have been conducted on the influence of access cavity design on the load capacity of RTT, the results are inconclusive. While some studies report that MIACs improve tooth strength [3,17,18], other studies are contradictory [15,19,20]. Moreover, investigations using finite element analysis have created further controversy as they have shown hard tissue preservation leads to lower cervical stress concentration, thus leading to improved load capacity [21][22][23][24].…”