Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Fracture resistance of upper central incisors restored with different posts and cores

  • Rezaei Dastjerdi, Maryam (Dental Material Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Babol University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Amirian Chaijan, Kamran (Dental Material Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Babol University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Tavanafar, Saeid (Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Babol University of Medical Sciences)
  • Received : 2015.02.04
  • Accepted : 2015.05.11
  • Published : 2015.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: To determine and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary central incisors restored with different posts and cores. Materials and Methods: Forty-eight upper central incisors were randomly divided into four groups: cast post and core (group 1), fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) post and composite core (group 2), composite post and core (group 3), and controls (group 4). Mesio-distal and bucco-lingual dimensions at 7 and 14 mm from the apex were compared to ensure standardization among the groups. Twelve teeth were prepared for crown restoration (group 4). Teeth in other groups were endodontically treated, decoronated at 14 mm from the apex, and prepared for posts and cores. Resin-based materials were used for cementation in groups 1 and 2. In group 3, composite was used directly to fill the post space and for core build-up. All samples were restored by standard metal crowns using glass ionomer cement, mounted at $135^{\circ}$ vertical angle, subjected to thermo-mechanical aging, and then fractured using a universal testing machine. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to analyze the data. Results: Fracture resistance of the groups was as follows: Control (group 4) > cast post and core (group 1) > fiber post and composite core (group 2) > composite post and core (group 3). All samples in groups 2 and 3 fractured in restorable patterns, whereas most (58%) in group 1 were non-restorable. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, FRC posts showed acceptable fracture resistance with favorable fracture patterns for reconstruction of upper central incisors.

Keywords

References

  1. Hansen EK, Asmussen E, Christiansen NC. In vivo fractures of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with amalgam. Endod Dent Traumatol 1990;6:49-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.1990.tb00389.x
  2. Qing H, Zhu Z, Chao Y, Zhang W. In vitro evaluation of the fracture resistance of anterior endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fiber and zircon posts. J Prosthet Dent 2007;97:93-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.12.008
  3. Sahafi A, Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E, Gotfredsen K. Retention and failure morphology of prefabricated posts. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:307-312.
  4. Nergiz I, Schmage P, Ozcan M, Platzer U. Effect of length and diameter of tapered posts on the retention. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:28-34. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2002.00806.x
  5. Fernandes AS, Shetty S, Coutinho I. Factors determining post selection: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:556-562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.09.006
  6. Duret B, Reynaud M, Duret F. New concept of coronoradicular reconstruction: the Composipost (1). Chir Dent Fr 1990;60:131-141.
  7. Duret B, Reynaud M, Duret F. A new concept of coronoradicular reconstruction, the Composipost (2). Chir Dent Fr 1990;60:69-77.
  8. Fredriksson M, Astback J, Pamenius M, Arvidson K. A retrospective study of 236 patients with teeth restored by carbon fiber-reinforced epoxy resin posts. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:151-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70103-9
  9. Ferrari M, Vichi A, Mannocci F, Mason PN. Retrospective study of the clinical performance of fiber posts. Am J Dent 2000;13:9B-13B.
  10. Strassler HE, Cloutier PC. A new fiber post for esthetic dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2003;24:742-748.
  11. Fovet Y, Pourreyron L, Gal JY. Corrosion by galvanic coupling between carbon fiber posts and different alloys. Dent Mater 2000;16:364-373. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00039-7
  12. Liden C, Norberg K. Nickel on the Swedish market. Follow-up after implementation of the Nickel Directive. Contact Dermatitis 2005;52:29-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.00494.x
  13. Vichi A, Vano M, Ferrari M. The effect of different storage conditions and duration on the fracture strength of three types of translucent fiber posts. Dent Mater 2008;24:832-838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.09.011
  14. Monticelli F, Ferrari M, Toledano M. Cement system and surface treatment selection for fiber post luting. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2008;13:E214-E221.
  15. Varvara G, Perinetti G, Di Iorio D, Murmura G, Caputi S. In vitro evaluation of fracture resistance and failure mode of internally restored endodontically treated maxillary incisors with differing heights of residual dentin. J Prosthet Dent 2007;98:365-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60121-8
  16. Naumann M, Preuss A, Rosentritt M. Effect of incomplete crown ferrules on load capacity of endodontically treated maxillary incisors restored with fiber posts, composite build-ups, and all-ceramic crowns: an in vitro evaluation after chewing simulation. Acta Odontol Scand 2006;64:31-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016350500331120
  17. Sirimai S, Riis DN, Morgano SM. An in vitro study of the fracture resistance and the incidence of vertical root fracture of pulpless teeth restored with six post-andcoresystems. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:262-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70267-2
  18. Zhang XH, Tong D, Wang XZ. The measurement and comparison of shear fracture strength and shear bond strength between carbon fiber post and some other posts. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2003;38:339-341.
  19. Heydecke G, Butz F, Strub JR. Fracture strength and survival rate of endodontically treated maxillary incisors with approximal cavities after restoration with different post and core systems: an in-vitro study. J Dent 2001;29:427-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(01)00038-0
  20. Kim JH, Park SH, Park JW, Jung IY. Influence of post types and sizes on fracture resistance in the immature tooth model. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2010;35:257-266. https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2010.35.4.257
  21. Ferrari M, Cagidiaco MC, Goracci C, Vichi A, Mason PN, Radovic I, Tay F. Long-term retrospective study of the clinical performance of fiber posts. Am J Dent 2007;20:287-291.
  22. Jung RE, Kalkstein O, Sailer I, Roos M, Hammerle CH. A comparison of composite post buildups and cast gold post-and-core buildups for the restoration of nonvital teeth after 5 to 10 years. Int J Prosthodont 2007;20:63-69.
  23. Dallari A, Rovatti L. Six years of in vitro/in vivo experience with Composipost. Compend Contin Educ Dent Suppl 1996:S57-S63.
  24. Duret B, Duret F, Reynaud M. Long-life physical property preservation and postendodontic rehabilitation with the Composipost. Compend Contin Educ Dent Suppl 1996:S50-S56.
  25. Cormier CJ, Burns DR, Moon P. In vitro comparison of the fracture resistance and failure mode of fiber, ceramic, and conventional post systems at various stages of restoration. J Prosthodont 2001;10:26-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2001.00026.x
  26. Hayashi M, Takahashi Y, Imazato S, Ebisu S. Fracture resistance of pulpless teeth restored with post-cores and crowns. Dent Mater 2006;22:477-485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.03.017
  27. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Serrao G, Dellavia C, Tartaglia GM. Single tooth bite forces in healthy young adults. J Oral Rehabil 2004;31:18-22. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0305-182X.2003.01179.x
  28. Bolay S, Ozturk E, Tuncel B, Ertan A. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with or without post systems. J Dent Sci 2012;7:148-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2012.03.011
  29. Maccari PC, Cosme DC, Oshima HM, Burnett LH Jr, Shinkai RS. Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth with flared root canals and restored with different post systems. J Esthet Restor Dent 2007;19:30-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2006.00060.x
  30. Rosentritt M, Furer C, Behr M, Lang R, Handel G. Comparison of in vitro fracture strength of metallic and tooth-coloured posts and cores. J Oral Rehabil 2000;27:595-601. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.2000.00548.x
  31. Maccari PC, Conceicao EN, Nunes MF. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with three different prefabricated esthetic posts. J Esthet Restor Dent 2003;15:25-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2003.tb00279.x
  32. Nothdurft FP, Seidel E, Gebhart F, Naumann M, Motter PJ, Pospiech PR. Influence of endodontic posts on the fracture behavior of crowned premolars with class II cavities. J Dent 2008;36:287-293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2008.01.007
  33. Fernandes AS, Dessai GS. Factors affecting the fracture resistance of post-core reconstructed teeth: a review. Int J Prosthodont 2001;14:355-363.
  34. Drummond JL, Bapna MS. Static and cyclic loading of fiber-reinforced dental resin. Dent Mater 2003;19:226-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(02)00034-9
  35. Juloski J, Radovic I, Goracci C, Vulicevic ZR, Ferrari M. Ferrule effect: a literature review. J Endod 2012;38:11-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.09.024
  36. Keum HJ, Yoo HM. Effect of surface treatments of fiber posts on bond strength to composite resin cores. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2010;35:173-179. https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2010.35.3.173
  37. Newman MP, Yaman P, Dennison J, Rafter M, Billy E. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with composite posts. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:360-367. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2003.75
  38. Mireku AS, Romberg E, Fouad AF, Arola D. Vertical fracture of root filled teeth restored with posts: the effects of patient age and dentine thickness. Int Endod J 2010;43:218-225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01661.x
  39. Soares CJ, Pizi EC, Fonseca RB, Martins LR. Influence of root embedment material and periodontal ligament simulation on fracture resistance tests. Braz Oral Res 2005;19:11-16. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-83242005000100003
  40. Libman WJ, Nicholls JI. Load fatigue of teeth restored with cast posts and cores and complete crowns. Int J Prosthodont 1995;8:155-161.

Cited by

  1. Impact of contracted endodontic cavities on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review of in vitro studies pp.1436-3771, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2268-y
  2. The effects of post and core material combination on the surface strain of the 4-unit zirconia fixed partial denture margins vol.36, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2016-343
  3. Tratamiento restaurador de lesiones dentales traumáticas. Reporte de tres casos clínicos vol.21, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rodmex.2017.09.006
  4. Restorative treatment of traumatic dental injuries. Report of three clinical cases vol.21, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rodmex.2017.09.015
  5. Effect of Glass Fiber Post Diameter on Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Teeth vol.20, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1590/pboci.2020.044
  6. One‐step fiber post cementation and core build‐up in endodontically treated tooth: A clinical case report vol.32, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12551
  7. Does ultraconservative access affect the efficacy of root canal treatment and the fracture resistance of two‐rooted maxillary premolars? vol.53, pp.2, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13219
  8. Efficacy of Root Canal Instrumentation and Fracture Strength Assessment in Primary Molars after Preparing Two Different Shapes of Access Cavity: An Ex Vivo Histological Study vol.14, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1997