Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolars Restored with Different Restorative Materials - An In Vitro Study

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i7.16150

Keywords:

Advanced restorative dentistry; Composites; Dental bonding; Dental cavity preparation; Dental restoration; Temporary restoration; Dental restoration failure.

Abstract

Aim: In this study was evaluated the fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with      different restorative materials. Methods: Sixty maxillary premolars were submitted to the same mesio-occlusal-distal cavity preparation, endodontic treatment and divided into 5 groups (n = 10): Coltosol Group – GCO restored with calcium silicate material; Glass Ionomer Cement Group – GGIC, restored with Maxxion R; Modified Glass Ionomer Cement – GMGIC, restored with Gold Label 2; Composite Group - GC, restored with Z100, and the positive control group (GP) - left unrestored. One group remained intact (n=10) serving as negative control (GN). Samples were subjected to fracture resistance testing by the universal testing machine until fracture occurred and was registered in newtons (N). Fracture pattern was assessed and described as favorable or unfavorable. The results were statistically analyzed by 1-way analysis of variance and the post hoc Tukey test with significant statistical difference at P < 0.05.  Results: Higher fracture resistance results were found for GC (1,128.35 ± 249.17), GMGIC (1,250.77 ± 173.29), and GN (1,277.22 ± 433.44) (P < .05). More favorable fractures were observed in the GCO (6), GC (7), and GN (7) (P < .05). Conclusion: Teeth restored with composite and modified GIC presented the same resistance as intact teeth. Teeth restored with Coltosol and GGIC presented similar resistance to unrestored teeth.

References

Atlas, A., Grandini, S., & Martignoni, M. (2019). Evidence-based treatment planning for the restoration of endodontically treated single teeth: importance of coronal seal, post vs no post, and indirect vs direct restoration. Quintessence Int (Berl), 50(10), 772-781.

Balkaya, H., Topçuoğlu, H. S., & Demirbuga, S. (2019). The Effect of Different Cavity Designs and Temporary Filling Materials on the Fracture Resistance of Upper Premolars. Journal of endodontics, 45(5), 628-633.

Braga, M. R., Messias, D. C., Macedo, L. M., Silva-Sousa, Y. C., & Gabriel, A. E. (2015). Rehabilitation of weakened premolars with a new polyfiber post and adhesive materials. Indian J Dent Res, 26(4), 400-5.

Daher, R., Ardu, S., Di Bella, E., Rocca, G. T., Feilzer, A. J., & Krejci, I. (2021). Fracture strength of non-invasively reinforced MOD cavities on endodontically treated teeth. Odontology, 109(2), 368-375.

Eapen, A. M., Amirtharaj, L. V., Sanjeev, K., & Mahalaxmi, S. (2017). Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with 2 different fiber-reinforced composite and 2 conventional composite resin core buildup materials: an in vitro study. Journal of endodontics, 43(9), 1499-1504.

Fathi, B., Bahcall, J., & Maki, J. S. (2007). An in vitro comparison of bacterial leakage of three common restorative materials used as an intracoronal barrier. Journal of endodontics, 33(7), 872-874.

Ivancik, J., Majd, H., Bajaj, D., Romberg, E., & Arola, D. (2012). Contributions of aging to the fatigue crack growth resistance of human dentin. Acta biomaterialia, 8(7), 2737-2746.

Jensen, A. L., Abbott, P. V., & Salgado, J. C. (2007). Interim and temporary restoration of teeth during endodontic treatment. Australian dental journal, 52, S83-S99.

Karzoun, W., Abdulkarim, A., Samran, A., & Kern, M. (2015). Fracture strength of endodontically treated maxillary premolars supported by a horizontal glass fiber post: an in vitro study. Journal of endodontics, 41(6), 907-912.

Krishan, R., Paqué, F., Ossareh, A., Kishen, A., Dao, T., & Friedman, S. (2014). Impacts of conservative endodontic cavity on root canal instrumentation efficacy and resistance to fracture assessed in incisors, premolars, and molars. Journal of endodontics, 40(8), 1160-1166.

Maske, A., Weschenfelder, V. M., Soares Grecca Vilella, F., Burnett Junior, L. H., & de Melo, T. A. F. (2021). Influence of access cavity design on fracture strength of endodontically treated lower molars. Australian Endodontic Journal, 47(1), 5-10.

Milani, A. S., Froughreyhani, M., Mohammadi, H., Tabegh, F. G., & Pournaghiazar, F. (2016). The effect of temporary restorative materials on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. General dentistry, 64(1), e1-4.

Mincik, J., Urban, D., Timkova, S., & Urban, R. (2016). Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored by various direct filling materials: an in vitro study. International journal of biomaterials, 2016.

Mitra, S. B. (1991). Adhesion to dentin and physical properties of a light-cured glass-ionomer liner/base. Journal of Dental Research, 70(1), 72-74.

Moore, B., Verdelis, K., Kishen, A., Dao, T., & Friedman, S. (2016). Impacts of contracted endodontic cavities on instrumentation efficacy and biomechanical responses in maxillary molars. Journal of endodontics, 42(12), 1779-1783.

Naseri, M., Ahangari, Z., Moghadam, M. S., & Mohammadian, M. (2012). Coronal sealing ability of three temporary filling materials. Iranian endodontic journal, 7(1), 20.

Ozsevik, A. S., Yildirim, C., Aydin, U., Culha, E., & Surmelioglu, D. (2016). Effect of fibre‐reinforced composite on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. Australian Endodontic Journal, 42(2), 82-87.

Pai, S. F., Yang, S. F., Sue, W. L., Chueh, L. H., & Rivera, E. M. (1999). Microleakage between endodontic temporary restorative materials placed at different times. Journal of endodontics, 25(6), 453-456.

Pakdeethai, S., Abuzar, M., & Parashos, P. (2013). Fracture patterns of glass–ionomer cement overlays versus stainless steel bands during endodontic treatment: an ex‐vivo study. International endodontic journal, 46(12), 1115-1124.

Plotino, G., Grande, N. M., Isufi, A., Ioppolo, P., Pedullà, E., Bedini, R., & Testarelli, L. (2017). Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth with different access cavity designs. Journal of endodontics, 43(6), 995-1000.

Sadaf, D. (2020). Survival Rates of Endodontically Treated Teeth After Placement of Definitive Coronal Restoration: 8-Year Retrospective Study. Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 16, 125.

Sidhu, S. K., & Watson, T. F. (1995). Resin-modified glass ionomer materials. A status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. American Journal of Dentistry, 8(1), 59-67.

Silva, M. E. C. da, & Tolentino Júnior, D. S. (2021). Evaluation of coronary microleakage in temporary restorative materials used in endodontics. Research, Society and Development, 10(6), e22210615584.

Soares, C. J., Pizi, E. C. G., Fonseca, R. B., & Martins, L. R. M. (2005). Influence of root embedment material and periodontal ligament simulation on fracture resistance tests. Brazilian Oral Research, 19(1), 11-16.

Taha, N. A., Maghaireh, G. A., Bagheri, R., & Holy, A. A. (2015). Fracture strength of root filled premolar teeth restored with silorane and methacrylate-based resin composite. Journal of dentistry, 43(6), 735-741.

Tennert, C., Fischer, G. F., Vach, K., Woelber, J. P., Hellwig, E., & Polydorou, O. (2016). A temporary filling material during endodontic treatment may cause tooth fractures in two-surface class II cavities in vitro. Clinical oral investigations, 20(3), 615-620.

Tortopidis, D., Lyons, M. F., Baxendale, R. H., & Gilmour, W. H. (1998). The variability of bite force measurement between sessions, in different positions within the dental arch. Journal of oral rehabilitation, 25(9), 681-686.

Wilson, A. D., & Kent, B. E. (1971). The glass‐ionomer cement, a new translucent dental filling material. Journal of Applied Chemistry and Biotechnology, 21(11), 313-313.

Young, A. M. (2002). FTIR investigation of polymerisation and polyacid neutralisation kinetics in resin-modified glass-ionomer dental cements. Biomaterials, 23(15), 3289-3295.

Downloads

Published

13/06/2021

How to Cite

MAEDA, W.; NASCIMENTO, W. M. .; COELHO, M. S. .; CAMPOS , D. de L. .; DRUMOND , J. P. .; SOARES, A. de J. .; FROZONI, M. . Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolars Restored with Different Restorative Materials - An In Vitro Study. Research, Society and Development, [S. l.], v. 10, n. 7, p. e5110716150, 2021. DOI: 10.33448/rsd-v10i7.16150. Disponível em: https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/16150. Acesso em: 22 nov. 2024.

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 7

Section

Health Sciences

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Walber Maeda; Wayne Martins Nascimento; Marcelo Santos Coelho; Danilo de Luca Campos ; João Paulo Drumond ; Adriana de Jesus Soares; Marcos Frozoni

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.