Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Effect of two different types of fibers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with composite resin.
J Adhes Dent. 2013 Apr; 15(2):167-71.JA

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the in vitro fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars with mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities restored with two different types of fibers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty extracted human mandibular first molars were selected for the study and randomly assigned to six groups (n = 10). Group 1 served as the control. In groups 2 through 6, endodontic access and standard MOD cavities were prepared. Following root canal treatment, group 2 was left unrestored. In group 3, the teeth were restored with composite resin (Venus, Heraeus Kulzer). In group 4, flowable composite resin (Venus, Heraeus Kulzer) was used before restoring the teeth with composite resin. In group 5, leno-woven ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene ribbon fiber (Ribbond) was inserted in the flowable resin in a buccal to lingual direction, and the teeth were then restored with composite resin. In group 6, translucent glass fiber (Vectris, Ivoclar) was adapted over the flowable resin in the bucco-lingual direction and restored with composite resin. The specimens were stored in 100% humidity at 37°C for 1 day. Compressive loading of the teeth was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The mean load necessary to fracture the samples was recorded in Newtons (N). Data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan's post-hoc test, where significance was set at p < 0.001.

RESULTS

The highest and the lowest mean fracture strengths were found in sound teeth (1598.8 N) and unrestored teeth (393.7 N), respectively. The mean load necessary to fracture the samples was 958.6 N in the polyethylene ribbon group (group 5), 913.2 N in the glass-fiber group (group 6), 699.7 N in teeth restored with flowable resin and composite (group 4), and 729.3 N in group 3 with composite resin alone. Statistical analysis showed significantly higher fracture resistance of both the fiber groups compared to composite resin alone (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both polyethylene ribbon and glass fiber under MOD composite restorations significantly increased fracture strength with no statistical difference between the two groups. Therefore, both polyethylene- and glassfiber- reinforced composites can be used for access cavity restorations in teeth with weakened cusps.

Links

Publisher Full Text

Authors+Show Affiliations

Khan SI
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Chettinad Dental College, Kelambakkkam, India. dr.sulthankhan@gmail.com
Anupama R
No affiliation info available
Deepalakshmi M
No affiliation info available
Kumar KS
No affiliation info available

MeSH

Analysis of VarianceComposite ResinsCompressive StrengthDental Cavity LiningDental Restoration, PermanentDental Stress AnalysisGlassHumansMaterials TestingMolarPolyethylenesPolymerizationStatistics, NonparametricTooth FracturesTooth, Nonvital

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

23534017

Citation

Khan, Sulthan Ibrahim, et al. "Effect of Two Different Types of Fibers On the Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Molars Restored With Composite Resin." The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, vol. 15, no. 2, 2013, pp. 167-71.
Khan SI, Anupama R, Deepalakshmi M, et al. Effect of two different types of fibers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with composite resin. J Adhes Dent. 2013;15(2):167-71.
Khan, S. I., Anupama, R., Deepalakshmi, M., & Kumar, K. S. (2013). Effect of two different types of fibers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with composite resin. The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, 15(2), 167-71. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a28731
Khan SI, et al. Effect of Two Different Types of Fibers On the Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Molars Restored With Composite Resin. J Adhes Dent. 2013;15(2):167-71. PubMed PMID: 23534017.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Effect of two different types of fibers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with composite resin. AU - Khan,Sulthan Ibrahim, AU - Anupama,Ramachandran, AU - Deepalakshmi,Mohanavelu, AU - Kumar,Kumarappan Senthil, PY - 2013/3/28/entrez PY - 2013/3/28/pubmed PY - 2013/7/3/medline SP - 167 EP - 71 JF - The journal of adhesive dentistry JO - J Adhes Dent VL - 15 IS - 2 N2 - PURPOSE: To compare the in vitro fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars with mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities restored with two different types of fibers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty extracted human mandibular first molars were selected for the study and randomly assigned to six groups (n = 10). Group 1 served as the control. In groups 2 through 6, endodontic access and standard MOD cavities were prepared. Following root canal treatment, group 2 was left unrestored. In group 3, the teeth were restored with composite resin (Venus, Heraeus Kulzer). In group 4, flowable composite resin (Venus, Heraeus Kulzer) was used before restoring the teeth with composite resin. In group 5, leno-woven ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene ribbon fiber (Ribbond) was inserted in the flowable resin in a buccal to lingual direction, and the teeth were then restored with composite resin. In group 6, translucent glass fiber (Vectris, Ivoclar) was adapted over the flowable resin in the bucco-lingual direction and restored with composite resin. The specimens were stored in 100% humidity at 37°C for 1 day. Compressive loading of the teeth was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The mean load necessary to fracture the samples was recorded in Newtons (N). Data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan's post-hoc test, where significance was set at p < 0.001. RESULTS: The highest and the lowest mean fracture strengths were found in sound teeth (1598.8 N) and unrestored teeth (393.7 N), respectively. The mean load necessary to fracture the samples was 958.6 N in the polyethylene ribbon group (group 5), 913.2 N in the glass-fiber group (group 6), 699.7 N in teeth restored with flowable resin and composite (group 4), and 729.3 N in group 3 with composite resin alone. Statistical analysis showed significantly higher fracture resistance of both the fiber groups compared to composite resin alone (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both polyethylene ribbon and glass fiber under MOD composite restorations significantly increased fracture strength with no statistical difference between the two groups. Therefore, both polyethylene- and glassfiber- reinforced composites can be used for access cavity restorations in teeth with weakened cusps. SN - 1461-5185 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/23534017/Effect_of_two_different_types_of_fibers_on_the_fracture_resistance_of_endodontically_treated_molars_restored_with_composite_resin_ L2 - https://www.quintessence-publishing.com/deu/en/article/843040 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -