Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2011.3.2.90

A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post core systems - an in-vitro study  

Makade, Chetana S. (Department of Conservative Dentistry, VSPM's Dental College and Research Centre Nagpur)
Meshram, Ganesh K. (Department of Conservative Dentistry, Peoples College of Dental Sciences)
Warhadpande, Manjusha (Department of Conservative Dentistry, Government Dental College & Hospital Nagpur)
Patil, Pravinkumar G. (Department of Prosthodontics, Government Dental College & Hospital Nagpur)
Publication Information
The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics / v.3, no.2, 2011 , pp. 90-95 More about this Journal
Abstract
PURPOSE. To compare the fracture resistance and the mode of failure of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post-core systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Root canal treatment was performed on 40 maxillary incisors and the samples were divided into four groups of 10 each. For three experimental groups post space preparation was done and teeth were restored with cast post-core (Group B), stainless steel post with composite core (Group C) and glass fiber post with composite core using adhesive resin cement (Group D). Control group (A) samples were selected with intact coronal structure. All the samples were prepared for ideal abutment preparation. All the samples were subjected to a load of 0.5 mm/min at $130^{circ}$.until fracture occurred using the universal testing machine. The fracture resistance was measured and the data were analyzed statistically. The fracture above the embedded resin was considered to be favorable and the fracture below the level was considered as unfavorable. The statistical analysis of fracture resistance between different groups was carried out with t-test. For the mode of failure the statistical analysis was carried out by Kruskal-Wallis test and Chi-Square test. RESULTS. For experimental group Vs control group the fracture resistance values showed significant differences (P<.05). For the mode of failure the chi-square value is 16.1610, which means highly significant (P=.0009) statistically. CONCLUSION. Endodontically treated teeth without post core system showed the least fracture resistance demonstrating the need to reinforce the tooth. Stainless steel post with composite core showed the highest fracture resistance among all the experimental groups. Teeth restored with the Glass fiber post showed the most favorable fractures making them more amenable to the re-treatment.
Keywords
Cast post core; Glass fiber post; Prefabricated stainless steel posts; Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Fredriksson M, Astback J, Pamenius M, Arvidson K. A retrospective study of 236 patients with teeth restored by carbon fiberreinforced epoxy resin posts. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:151-7.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Torbjorner A, Karlsson S, Odman PA. Survival rate and failure characteristics for two post designs. J Prosthet Dent 1995;73:439-44.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Galen WW, Mueller KI. Restoration of the Endodontically Treated Tooth. In Cohen S, Burns RC, editors: Pathways of the Pulp. 8th ed. St. Louis; Mosby; 2002. p. 765-96.
4 Martlnez-Insua A, da Silva L, Rilo B, Santana U. Comparison of the fracture resistances of pulpless teeth restored with a cast post and core or carbon-fiber post with a composite core. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:527-32.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Standlee JP, Caputo AA, Collard EW, Pollack MH. Analysis of stress distribution by endodontic posts. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1972;33:952-60.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Chan RW, Bryant RW. Post-core foundations for endodontically treated posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1982;48:401-6.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Freedman GA. Esthetic post-and-core treatment. Dent Clin North Am 2001;45:103-16.
8 Lovdahl PE, Nicholls JI. Pin-retained amalgam cores vs. castgold dowel-cores. J Prosthet Dent 1977;38:507-14.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Glassman GD, Serota KS. Endoesthetics. Rehabilitation of the endodontically treated tooth. Dent Clin North Am 1998;42:799-811, xii.
10 Shillingburg HT, Hobo S, Whitsett LD, Jacobi R, Brackett SE, editors. Preparations for extensively damaged teeth. In: Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. Chicago; Quintessence; 1997. p. 181-209.
11 Sorensen JA, Martinoff JT. Clinically significant factors in dowel design. J Prosthet Dent 1984;52:28-35.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Akkayan B, Gulmez T. Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post systems. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:431-7.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Ottl P, Hahn L, Lauer HCh, Fay M. Fracture characteristics of carbon fibre, ceramic and non-palladium endodontic post systems at monotonously increasing loads. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:175-83.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Anusavice KJ. Mechanical Properties of Dental Materials (Chapter 4). In: Phillips' Science of Dental Materials. 10th ed. Philadelphia; WB Saunders Co.; 1996. p. 49-74.
15 Wadhwani KK, Shrivastava S, Nigam P. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of various post systems: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2003;6:56-61.
16 Sidoli GE, King PA, Setchell DJ. An in vitro evaluation of a carbon fiber-based post and core system. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:5-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Dean JP, Jeansonne BG, Sarkar N. In vitro evaluation of a carbon fiber post. J Endod 1998;24:807-10.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Trope M, Maltz DO, Tronstad L. Resistance to fracture of restored endodontically treated teeth. Endod Dent Traumatol 1985;1:108-11.   DOI
19 Robbins JW. Restoration of the endodontically treated tooth. Dent Clin North Am 2002;46:367-84.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Newman MP, Yaman P, Dennison J, Rafter M, Billy E. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with composite posts. J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:360-7.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 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.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Sirimai S, Riis DN, Morgano SM. An in vitro study of the fracture resistance and the incidence ofvertical root fracture of pulpless teeth restored with six post-and-coresystems. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:262-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Kantor ME, Pines MS. A comparative study of restorative techniques for pulpless teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1977;38:405-12.   DOI   ScienceOn