Literature DB >> 17555181

The effect of marginal ridge thickness on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated, composite restored maxillary premolars.

Shahrbaf Shahrbaf1, Behnam Mirzakouchaki, Siavash Savadi Oskoui, Mehdi Abed Kahnamoui.   

Abstract

This study evaluated the effect of varying thicknesses of marginal ridge on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated maxillary premolars restored with composite. Ninety non-carious maxillary premolars, extracted for orthodontic reasons, were selected for this experimental in vitro study. The teeth were randomly assigned to six groups (n=15). Group 1 received no preparation. In groups 2 through 6, the premolars were root filled and DO preparations were created, while MOD preparations were also created for group 2. The condition of the boxes was: the gingival seat was 1.5 mm above the CEJ and the buccolingual dimensions were 3.5 mm in gingival and 3 mm in occlusal. In groups 3 through 6, the dimensions of the mesial marginal ridge were measured using a digital caliper as follows: 2 mm, 1.5 mm, 1 mm and 0.5 mm, respectively. All samples in groups 2 through 6 were restored with a dentin bonding system (DBS: Single Bond, 3M) and resin composite (Z 250, 3M). Subsequently, premolars from all six groups were subjected to a thermocycling regimen of 500 cycles between 5 degrees C and 55oC water baths. Dwell time was 30 seconds, with a 10-second transfer time between baths. The premolars were submitted to axial compression up to failure at a 45 degrees angle to the palatal cusp in Universal Test Equipment (Tinius Olsen, Ltd, H5K-S model). The mean load necessary to fracture the samples was recorded in newtons (N), and data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and LSD post-hoc test. According to these results, the mean loads necessary to fracture the samples in each group were (in N): group 1: 732 +/- 239, group 2:489 +/- 149, group 3: 723 +/- 147, group 4: 696 +/- 118, group 5: 654 +/- 183 and group 6: 506 +/- 192). Differences between group 1 and groups 2 and 6, and also differences between groups 3, 4 and 5 compared with group 2 and 6 were statistically significant (p < 0.05).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17555181     DOI: 10.2341/06-83

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oper Dent        ISSN: 0361-7734            Impact factor:   2.440


  4 in total

1.  Fracture resistance of weakened teeth restored with condensable resin with and without cusp coverage.

Authors:  Rafael Francisco Lia Mondelli; Sérgio Kiyoshi Ishikiriama; Otávio de Oliveira Filho; José Mondelli
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2009 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.698

2.  Dentists' decisions regarding the need for cuspal coverage for endodontically treated and vital posterior teeth.

Authors:  Motasum Abu-Awwad
Journal:  Clin Exp Dent Res       Date:  2019-04-15

3.  Influence of type of final restoration on the fracture resistance and fracture mode of endodontically treated premolars with occluso-mesial cavities.

Authors:  Salwa Omar Bajunaid; Norah Omar AlSadhan; Noura AlBuqmi; Reem Alghamdi
Journal:  Saudi Dent J       Date:  2020-10-20

Review 4.  Influence of Methodological Variables on Fracture Strength Tests Results of Premolars with Different Number of Residual Walls. A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Carlo Gaeta; Crystal Marruganti; Emanuele Mignosa; Giovanni Franciosi; Edoardo Ferrari; Simone Grandini
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-02
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.