Analysis of stress distribution in a maxillary central incisor subjected to various post and core applications

Finite element analysis of maxillary central incisors restored with various post-and-core applications

“…Another reason is that in vitro studies on fracture resistance are encumbered with standard deviations that are relatively very high. Because of the large variability of the results obtained from in vitro studies, an increasing number of investigations of dowel-restored teeth are based on finite element analysis [8][9][10][11] .…”

“…Although finite element analysis doesn't permit any variation in interpreting results, considerable controversy exists regarding the optimal choice of material of dowel and core in previous finite element analysis studies. In one study, a root canal dowel of high modulus is recommended 13) , while another advocates that a modulus of elasticity close to that of dentin is preferable 8) . That is because the stress distribution patterns simulated may be different depending on the model used in the experiments.…”

Analysis of stress distribution of tooth restored with metal-ceramic crown covering abfraction lesion according to its finish line location under occlusal load

“…Dentine was modeled as isotropic and homogenous material. 10,11 The occlusal load was applied at the buccal cusp of the mandibular first premolar. The amount and angle of occlusal load was 144 N and 45�respectively (Fig.…”

Biomechanical Models of Endodontic Restorations

“…This range is covered in different biomechanical models Boschian Pest et al, 2006;Ferrari et al, 2008;Ichim et al, 2006;Soares et al, 2010). However, some works did not include the ligament (Yaman et al, 1998;Zarone et al, 2006), despite it has been reported that stress distribution is affected to an important degree by this omission (Davy et al, 1981) or even by a geometrically simplified representation (Toms & Eberhardt, 2003). When cement layers are considered in the biomechanical model, they are usually represented with a constant small thickness Maceri et al, 2009;Okamoto et al, 2008;Schmitter et al, 2010).…”