{"title":"Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored with Composite Overlays with and without Glass-fiber Reinforcement.","authors":"C. Monaco, A. Arena, R. Scotti, I. Krejci","doi":"10.3290/j.jad.a35908","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":94234,"journal":{"name":"The journal of adhesive dentistry","volume":"81 1","pages":"143-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of adhesive dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a35908","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12
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.