The Effects of Different Base Materials on the Stress Distribution of the Endodontically Treated Teeth: 3D FEA

Abstract

Objectives: This study evaluated stress distrubitions formed by oblique forces in dental hard tissues, base materials and restorations of endodontically treated permanent mandibular first molars that were restored with different base materials and direct composite restorations by using 3D-FEA method. Materials and Methods: For two different restorative approaches; an MO cavity design and a MOD cavity design was created. Then root canal obturation was modeled. Composite resin (CR), conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC), fiber reinforced composite resin (FRC), resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), flowable composite (FC), and bulk-fill composite resin (BF) were used as base materials. Von Mises, compressive and tensile stresses in enamel, dentin, base materials and final restoration were analyzed using finite element stress analysis method.Results: Regarding the resulting stresses, CR caused highest stresses and RMGIC caused lowest stresses in enamel, base material, and final restoration. RMGIC caused highest stresses and CR caused lowest stresses in dentin. It was noted that MOD cavity design caused more stress than MO cavity design for all analyzed materials. Conclusions:Materials with elastic moduli similar to dentin; FRC and GIC, may be better choice to avoid high stresses within the tooth and restoration.

Stress Analysis on Mesiolingual Cavity of Endodontically Treated Molar Restored Using Bidirectional Fiber-Reinforced Composite (Wallpapering Technique)

“…Cancellous bone 17 1.37 0.30 Polyethylene Fiber (Ribbon THM) 18 23.6 0.32 E-Glass Fiber Bidirectional (Everstick Net) 9 8.87 0.35 Packable composite resin (Grandio, VOCO) 19 20.4 0.33…”

Stress Distribution of Endodontically Treated Tooth MOD Cavity Restored with Ribbon Fiber-Reinforced Composite (Wallpapering Technique) Using Finite Element Method

“…Following the simulation, maximum and minimum principal stress values were obtained for quantitative analysis, as presented in Tables 3 and 4. The data in Tables 3 and 4 indicate that the stress generated within each material did not Cancellous bone 18 1.37 0.30 Polyethylene Fiber (Ribbon THM)-Longitudinal (X,Y) 19 23.6 0.32 E-Glass Fiber Bidirectional (Everstick Net)-Longitudinal (X,Y) 20 8.87 0.35 Packable composite resin (Grandio, VOCO) 21 20.4 0.33…”

Evaluation of Stress Distribution in Root Canal Treated Maxillary Incisors Treated with Different Fiber-Reinforced Composite Resins by Finite Element Analysis

“…'larının yapmış oldukları bir in vitro çalışmada, KKT'li dişlerdeki restorasyonlarda kompozit rezinlerin altında kısa fiber takviyeli kompozit rezinlerin alt yapı olarak kullanılması sayesinde kalan diş dokusunun daha fazla korunduğu ve kırılma direncinin daha yüksek olduğu bildirilmiştir (28). KKT sonrası farklı kaide materyallerinin stres üzerindeki etkilerini inceleyen bir SEA çalışmasında da kısa fiber takviyeli kompozit rezinlerin dentinle benzer elastik modülüne sahip olması sebebiyle restorasyon içinde ve dişte meydana gelebilecek yüksek gerilimlerden kaçınmak amacıyla kullanımının avantajlı olduğu bildirilmiştir (29). Bu çalışmada elde ettiğimiz sonuçlar in vitro ve SEA çalışmaları ile paralellik göstermektedir.…”