Effect of Fiber Post and Cusp Coverage on Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolars Directly Restored with Composite Resin

Mohammadi, Narmin; Kahnamoii, Mehdi Abed; Yeganeh, Parnian Karimi; Navimipour, Elmira Jafari

doi:10.1016/j.joen.2009.07.010

Cited by 70 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a significant reinforcement effect was obtained with the insertion of a glass fiber post within the direct composite restoration. Fiber post insertion within a composite restoration can improve the ability of the tooth-restoration complex to absorb the occlusal loads along the major axis of the tooth [37]; could increase the resistance of the endodontically treated tooth to occlusal loads [38,39]; and may cause less cuspal deflection, thus reducing the possibility of marginal leakage that creates a gap at the tooth-restoration interface with consequent marginal infiltration [40]. A favorable effect of a fiber post-supported composite restoration in the longevity of post-endodontic restorations has been reported in several in vivo studies [6,41].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

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

Section: Discussionmentioning

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

show abstract

“…Metal post as the most commonly used material in clinical practice, but post dislocation and root fracture are the main reasons of failure 20) . Meanwhile, several attempts have been made to improve the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with different post systems, and could change the rate of root fracture 4,8) . Other studies recommend cusp coverage to restore the fracture resistance 9) , because they protect cusps which are not shifted to the outside 21) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fiber posts with a modulus of elasticity similar to dentin, when subjected to a compressive load, can better distribute forces along the long axis of the post, which may decrease the probability of root dentin fracture 7) . However, some studies revealed that endodontically treated maxillary premolars without fiber posts exhibited similar fracture resistance to those with a post 5,8) . Several authors recommend cusp coverage to restore weak posterior teeth 9) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture resistance of palatal cusps defective premolars restored with polyethylene fiber and composite resin

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Others, however, indicate that cusp capping with the adhesive technique is not necessary in terms of cuspal fracture resistance in normal occlusion, especially in root-filled premolars [76][77][78] or if a fiber post is included [77]. A recent FEA study showed that palatal cusp reduction improves the biomechanics of a tooth restoration complex, consequently providing long-lasting clinical results [79].…”

Section: Fiber-reinforced Composite Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Direct Restoration of Endodontically Treated Teeth: a Brief Summary of Materials and Techniques

Bellí

Eraslan

Eskitaşçıoğlu

2015

Curr Oral Health Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The restoration of endodontically treated teeth remains a challenge. The success of the final restoration depends mostly on the structure of the remaining tooth. Although the materials and procedures available today result in successful restoration of root-filled teeth via direct (in situ) techniques, one should first consider the amount of the coronal tooth structure remaining as well as the functional requirements. Restoration using direct composite resin is a good treatment option, but polymerization shrinkage is one of the major limitations of this material. The application of various base materials under the composite resin is an effective method. Covering the cusps with the restorative material is another option to save the remaining tooth structure; however, some materials may be unsuitable in stress-bearing areas. Materials applied to the orifice of a root canal also have a major effect on tooth biomechanics. This article reviews the direct restoration of endodontically treated teeth and discusses the current materials and techniques used for this purpose.

show abstract

Effect of Fiber Post and Cusp Coverage on Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolars Directly Restored with Composite Resin

Cited by 70 publications

References 26 publications

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

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

Fracture resistance of palatal cusps defective premolars restored with polyethylene fiber and composite resin

Direct Restoration of Endodontically Treated Teeth: a Brief Summary of Materials and Techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About