Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored with Composite Overlays with and without Glass-fiber Reinforcement.
J Adhes Dent. 2016; 18(2):143-9.JA

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the fracture strength and the failure mode of endodontically treated teeth restored with composite resin overlays with and without glass-fiber reinforcement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 32 extracted molars were divided into four equal groups. In the NFR-NFRC (no foundation restoration, no fiber-reinforced composite) and NFR-FRC (no foundation restoration, fiber-reinforced composite) groups, only a 5-mm-thick composite resin layer sealed the pulp chamber floors, whereas in the FR-NFRC (foundation restoration, no fiber-reinforced composite) and FR-FRC (foundation restoration, fiber-reinforced composite) groups, a 3.0-mm foundation restoration was used. NFR-NFRC and FR-NFRC groups were restored with composite resin overlays, whereas NFR-FRC and FR-FRC groups were restored with fiber-reinforced composite resin overlays. All specimens were subjected to mechanical loading in a computer-controlled masticator and then the fracture resistance was evaluated. Differences in means were compared using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test. The level of significance was set at ɑ = 0.05.

RESULTS

All specimens successfully completed the fatigue test. The least fracture-resistant group was NFR-FRC, exceeded by FR-NFRC, NFR-NFRC, and FR-FRC, in that order, with FR-FRC being the most fracture-resistant group. Statistically significant differences were detected between the pairs NFR-NFRC/FR-FRC (p = 0.001), NFR-FRC/FR-FRC (p = 0.001), and FR-NFRC/FR-FRC (p = 0.001). Eight vertical root fractures occurred in group FR-NFRC, six in group NFR-NFRC, four in group NFR-FRC, and none occurred in group FR-FRC.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the incorporation of glass fibers and the presence of a foundation restoration were found to increase the fracture resistance and can favorably influence the fracture mode.

Authors

No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

27042706

Citation

Monaco, Carlo, et al. "Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Composite Overlays With and Without Glass-fiber Reinforcement." The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, vol. 18, no. 2, 2016, pp. 143-9.
Monaco C, Arena A, Scotti R, et al. Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored with Composite Overlays with and without Glass-fiber Reinforcement. J Adhes Dent. 2016;18(2):143-9.
Monaco, C., Arena, A., Scotti, R., & Krejci, I. (2016). Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored with Composite Overlays with and without Glass-fiber Reinforcement. The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, 18(2), 143-9. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a35908
Monaco C, et al. Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Composite Overlays With and Without Glass-fiber Reinforcement. J Adhes Dent. 2016;18(2):143-9. PubMed PMID: 27042706.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored with Composite Overlays with and without Glass-fiber Reinforcement. AU - Monaco,Carlo, AU - Arena,Antonio, AU - Scotti,Roberto, AU - Krejci,Ivo, PY - 2016/4/5/entrez PY - 2016/4/5/pubmed PY - 2016/7/9/medline SP - 143 EP - 9 JF - The journal of adhesive dentistry JO - J Adhes Dent VL - 18 IS - 2 N2 - PURPOSE: To evaluate the fracture strength and the failure mode of endodontically treated teeth restored with composite resin overlays with and without glass-fiber reinforcement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 32 extracted molars were divided into four equal groups. In the NFR-NFRC (no foundation restoration, no fiber-reinforced composite) and NFR-FRC (no foundation restoration, fiber-reinforced composite) groups, only a 5-mm-thick composite resin layer sealed the pulp chamber floors, whereas in the FR-NFRC (foundation restoration, no fiber-reinforced composite) and FR-FRC (foundation restoration, fiber-reinforced composite) groups, a 3.0-mm foundation restoration was used. NFR-NFRC and FR-NFRC groups were restored with composite resin overlays, whereas NFR-FRC and FR-FRC groups were restored with fiber-reinforced composite resin overlays. All specimens were subjected to mechanical loading in a computer-controlled masticator and then the fracture resistance was evaluated. Differences in means were compared using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test. The level of significance was set at ɑ = 0.05. RESULTS: All specimens successfully completed the fatigue test. The least fracture-resistant group was NFR-FRC, exceeded by FR-NFRC, NFR-NFRC, and FR-FRC, in that order, with FR-FRC being the most fracture-resistant group. Statistically significant differences were detected between the pairs NFR-NFRC/FR-FRC (p = 0.001), NFR-FRC/FR-FRC (p = 0.001), and FR-NFRC/FR-FRC (p = 0.001). Eight vertical root fractures occurred in group FR-NFRC, six in group NFR-NFRC, four in group NFR-FRC, and none occurred in group FR-FRC. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the incorporation of glass fibers and the presence of a foundation restoration were found to increase the fracture resistance and can favorably influence the fracture mode. SN - 1461-5185 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/27042706/Fracture_Strength_of_Endodontically_Treated_Teeth_Restored_with_Composite_Overlays_with_and_without_Glass_fiber_Reinforcement_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -