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

Department of Conservative Dentistry, VSPM's Dental College and Research Centre Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
The journal of advanced prosthodontics (Impact Factor: 0.64). 06/2011; 3(2):90-5. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2011.3.2.90
Source: PubMed


To compare the fracture resistance and the mode of failure of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post-core systems.
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° 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.
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.
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.

Download full-text


Available from: Pravinkumar Patil,
  • Source
    • "In addition to the fracture resistance, the fracture reparability is also a significant feature which determines the clinical success of a post-and-core system. Several studies have reported that the ceramic and metallic posts could increase the risk of vertical fracture due to their high stiffness and modulus of elasticities compared to those of natural dentin (Al-Wahadni et al. 2008; Makade et al. 2011). Therefore, restoring teeth with non-metallic posts, which has modulus of elasticity similar to those of dentin, has been carried out widely recently. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to investigate the simultaneous influence of various dental posts and cementation materials on the fracture resistance and failure mode of the endodontically-treated teeth. Sixty endodontically treated upper central incisors were randomly divided into two main groups, each consisted of three subgroups restored with titanium, fiber and stainless steel posts. The posts in the first and second groups were luted with zinc phosphate and composite resin cements, respectively. Composite cores were built-up over the specimens and then retained with nickel-chromium crowns. Specimens were thermocycled and then loaded at 135° until failures were observed. The obtained data of fracture resistances and failure modes were analyzed using Two-way ANOVA and the Chi-Square tests, respectively. The results showed that the zinc phosphate cement resulted in relatively higher fracture resistances. However, luting of dental posts with composite resin provided more restorable failures in endodontically-treated teeth. Moreover, the teeth restored by fiber posts exhibited desirable fracture resistances with more restorable failure modes, compared with those restored by titanium or stainless steel posts.
    Sains Malaysiana 08/2015; 44(8):1195-1200. DOI:10.17576/jsm-2015-4408-16 · 0.45 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Fiber posts may act as a distributor of stress applied to the crown [13] [14] [15] [16] and the whole tooth restoration will be a single unit and can improve fracture strength [10]. Nonetheless, there is little consensus with regard to the fiber post providing real teeth reinforcement [12] [16] [17]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: No previous study has tested the strength of teeth restored with a fiber post inside the root canal combined with a ribbon fiber in the crown surrounding the post. The aim of this study was to compare a new adhesive technique to other conventional techniques in the fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars. Fifty superior premolars were divided into 5 groups (n=10), prepared as follows: Intact teeth used in G1 as control; in the other experimental groups (G2, G3, G4 and G5), mesio-occlusal-distal cavities were prepared, extending toward the palatal cups (MODP), and root canal treatments were performed. Groups were restored by varying the restorative technique: G2–only with composite resin (CR); G3–fiber post+CR; G4- polyethylene fiber (Ribbond)+CR; and G5, Fiber post+Ribbond+CR. The teeth were thermocycled 1000 times. After 24 h, the specimens were loaded in a universal testing machine until fracture, and the failure mode was checked. ANOVA and Tukey-Krammer tests were used for statistical analysis (α=0.05). Results: The fracture strength (N) of control (G1- 410.7±106.9) was not significantly different (P>0.05) from Ribbond+CR (G4- 300.7±80.2) and Fiber post+Ribbond+CR (G5- 377.5±107.7). Specimens restored only with CR (G2- 177.7±52.1) and fiber post+CR (G3- 264.6±88.5) were statistically similar (P>0.05), but both had their mean values differed from the control (P<0.05). Longitudinal and oblique crown fractures were predominant in all groups. Ribbon-fiber reinforced resin restorations provided superior fracture resistance of premolars with MODP and endodontic access cavities when compared to conventional direct techniques.
    International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives 04/2014; 50. DOI:10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2014.01.030 · 1.77 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "To the best of our knowledge, fracture resistance in teeth treated with a post-core system has only been examined using static loading [2-7, 9, 10, 19-21] or finite element analysis that assumed occlusal force [7, 22]. That is to say, much remains to be clarified regarding the relationship between dynamic loading and traumatic injury. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This pilot study compared impact strain at the core and root surfaces between two different post-core systems. The form of a bovine mandibular front tooth was modified to resemble that of a human maxillary incisor as a test specimen. A cast post and core (Metal PC) and composite resin and glass fiber-reinforced epoxy resin post (Fiber-Resin PC) system were tested. Four gauges were affixed to the buccal and lingual surfaces of the core and root. The specimens were then embedded in a metal mold using dental stone. A pendulum-type device with a pyramid-shaped metal impact object with a titanium alloy head was used to provide 2 different shock forces. Maximum distortion was measured and analyzed. Distortion at the core at each measurement point and total amount of distortion with Fiber-Resin PC was significantly greater (p<0.05) than that with Metal PC against both impact forces. On the other hand, distortion at the root at the buccal measurement point with Fiber-Resin PC was significantly less than that with Metal PC against both impact forces. Total distortion was significantly less with Fiber-Resin PC than that with Metal PC against the greater impact shock. Acceleration with Fiber-Resin PC was significantly less than that with Metal PC against both impact forces. Fiber-Resin PC has the potential to protect remaining root against traumatic force. This suggests that a Fiber-Resin PC is more suitable for non-vital teeth against not only occlusal but also traumatic impact force.
    The Open Dentistry Journal 11/2013; 7(1):162-8. DOI:10.2174/1874210601307010162
Show more