| Literature DB >> 23956694 |
Abstract
The aim of this study was to analyze the stresses that develop by oblique and vertical forces in endodontically treated maxillary second premolars that were restored with resin composite. Additionally, in our study the effects of the different restorative approaches and use of different base materials on stress formation were analyzed using three-dimensional finite element stress analysis. For restoration, the models representing both cusp capping, palatinal cusp capping, standard MOD restoration, and use of woven fiber in occlusal part were prepared. In all models, oblique forces caused more stress than did vertical forces. Materials with low elastic moduli cause high amounts of stress, whereas materials with elastic moduli similar to that of dental tissues cause low amounts of stress. Additional approaches such as cusp capping, functional cusp capping, and woven fiber use do not affect stress formation on the tooth after endodontic treatment.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23956694 PMCID: PMC3730192 DOI: 10.1155/2013/426134
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 1Model preparation, (a) sound tooth model, (b) MOD and endodontic access cavity, (c, d) root-canal filling and resin modified glass ionomer, (e) adaptation of root-canal filling to model, (f) restoration, (g) modeling of PDL, (h, i, j) lamina dura, cortical, and cancellous bone, and (k) model of the endodontically treated tooth.
Figure 2Restorative approaches (a) buccal + palatinal cusps capped, (b) palatinal cusps capped, (c) MOD restoration, and (d) woven fiber used.
Material properties (Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio).
| Material | Young's modulus (GPa) | Poisson's ratio | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enamel | 41 | 0.31 | [ |
| Dentin | 18,6 | 0.31 | [ |
| Cortical bone | 13,7 | 0.30 | [ |
| Cancellous bone | 1,37 | 0.30 | [ |
| Periodontal ligament | 0.0000689 | 0.45 | [ |
| Composite resin | 12 | 0.30 | [ |
| Woven fiber | |||
| Longitudinal ( | 46 | 0.39 | [ |
| Transverse ( | 7 | 0.29 | [ |
| Transverse ( | 7 | 0.29 | [ |
| Fluid composite resin | 5,1 | 0.27 | [ |
| RMGI | 10,6 | 0.30 | [ |
| Guta perka | 0.14 | 0.45 | [ |
Maximum stress values in models to which vertical and oblique forces were applied.
| Restoration type | Base | Vertical force | Oblique force | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Max. | Enamel | Dentin | Max. | Enamel | Dentin | |||
| Model 1 | Buccal + palatinal cusps capping | RMGI | 23,2576 | 23,2576 | 7,47318 | 48,1163 | 48,1163 | 16,8935 |
| Model 2 | Palatinal cusp capping | RMGI | 23,2593 | 23,2593 | 7,46765 | 52,6151 | 52,6151 | 18,3603 |
| Model 3 | MOD restoration | RMGI | 23,2844 | 23,2844 | 7,48487 | 52,6108 | 52,6108 | 18,3592 |
| Model 4 | Woven fiber | RMGI | 24,279 | 24,279 | 7,41309 | 52,7324 | 52,7324 | 18,3862 |
| Model 5 | Buccal + palatinal cusps capping | Fluid composite | 25,019 | 25,019 | 7,99823 | 49,32 | 49,32 | 17,2984 |
| Model 6 | Palatinal cusp capping | Fluid composite | 25,0536 | 25,0536 | 7,99245 | 49,3576 | 49,3576 | 17,3073 |
| Model 7 | MOD restoration | Fluid composite | 25,078 | 25,078 | 8,01069 | 53,8333 | 53,8333 | 18,7693 |
| Model 8 | Woven fiber | Fluid composite | 26,1037 | 26,1037 | 7,94491 | 53,9383 | 53,9383 | 18,7906 |
| Model 9 | Buccal + palatinal cusps capping | No base | 22,0818 | 22,0818 | 7,15808 | 51,6907 | 51,6907 | 18,0553 |
| Model 10 | Palatinal cusp capping | No base | 22,083 | 22,083 | 7,15272 | 48,4006 | 48,4006 | 16,6957 |
| Model 11 | MOD restoration | No base | 22,1082 | 22,1082 | 7,16925 | 51,7573 | 51,7573 | 18,0709 |
| Model 12 | Woven fiber | No base | 23,2833 | 23,0794 | 7,09289 | 44,0467 | 44,0467 | 15,1938 |
Figure 3Principal stress distribution of Model 1 (buccal + palatinal cusps capped): (a) vertikal force applied ((a-1) enamel and dentin, (a-2) dentin) and (b) oblique force applied ((b-1) enamel and dentin, (b-2) dentin).