Cynthia Kassis1, Pierre Khoury2, Carina Z Mehanna1, Nadim Z Baba3, Fadi Bou Chebel4, Maha Daou5, Louis Hardan4. 1. Department of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, Saint-Joseph University, School of Dentistry, Beirut, Lebanon. 2. Department of Prosthodontics, Lebanese University, School of Dentistry, Beirut, Lebanon. 3. Advanced Education Program in Implant Dentistry, Loma Linda University, School of Dentistry, Loma Linda, CA. 4. Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, Saint-Joseph University, School of Dentistry, Beirut, Lebanon. 5. Dental Materials, Saint-Joseph University, School of Dentistry, Beirut, Lebanon.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the fracture resistance and failure modes of endodontically treated mandibular molars restored with different designs of inlays, onlays and endocrowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Extracted mandibular third molars (n = 180) were used. An access cavity was prepared on the occlusal surface of each tooth and the roots were obturated with gutta percha. All specimens were randomly divided into 6 groups (n = 30/group) according to the cavity design and the restoration material used. C: control group without access cavity preparation. IE: MOD inlay preparation with EverX Posterior (GC Europe) in the pulp chamber. IG: MOD inlay preparation with G-aenial Universal Flo (GC America) in the pulp chamber. OE: onlay preparation with EverX Posterior (GC Europe) in the pulp chamber. OG: onlay preparation with G-aenial Universal Flo (GC America) in the pulp chamber. EC: endocrown with an empty pulp chamber. All restorations were fabricated with CAD/CAM system using CERASMART® (GC Dental products Europe, Belgium) CAD/CAM blocks. Specimens were thermal-cycled and were subjected to a compressive load applied at 30° angle relative to the long axis of the tooth with a universal testing machine. Results were statistically analyzed by ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc tests. Chi-square test and Fisher Exact tests were used for the comparisons among groups. RESULTS: The mean fracture strength was significantly different between the groups (p < 0.001); it was significantly highest for intact teeth, followed by endocrowns (p = 0.021). The strength was significantly lower for inlays (with G-aenial Universal Flo and EverX Posterior), intermediate for onlays with EverX Posterior followed by onlays with G-aenial Universal Flo. CONCLUSIONS: Endocrowns exhibited higher fracture resistance than other tested composite resin groups. Endocrowns and onlays showed a more favorable failure mode than inlay restorations.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the fracture resistance and failure modes of endodontically treated mandibular molars restored with different designs of inlays, onlays and endocrowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Extracted mandibular third molars (n = 180) were used. An access cavity was prepared on the occlusal surface of each tooth and the roots were obturated with gutta percha. All specimens were randomly divided into 6 groups (n = 30/group) according to the cavity design and the restoration material used. C: control group without access cavity preparation. IE: MOD inlay preparation with EverX Posterior (GC Europe) in the pulp chamber. IG: MOD inlay preparation with G-aenial Universal Flo (GC America) in the pulp chamber. OE: onlay preparation with EverX Posterior (GC Europe) in the pulp chamber. OG: onlay preparation with G-aenial Universal Flo (GC America) in the pulp chamber. EC: endocrown with an empty pulp chamber. All restorations were fabricated with CAD/CAM system using CERASMART® (GC Dental products Europe, Belgium) CAD/CAM blocks. Specimens were thermal-cycled and were subjected to a compressive load applied at 30° angle relative to the long axis of the tooth with a universal testing machine. Results were statistically analyzed by ANOVA followed by Tukey post hoc tests. Chi-square test and Fisher Exact tests were used for the comparisons among groups. RESULTS: The mean fracture strength was significantly different between the groups (p < 0.001); it was significantly highest for intact teeth, followed by endocrowns (p = 0.021). The strength was significantly lower for inlays (with G-aenial Universal Flo and EverX Posterior), intermediate for onlays with EverX Posterior followed by onlays with G-aenial Universal Flo. CONCLUSIONS: Endocrowns exhibited higher fracture resistance than other tested composite resin groups. Endocrowns and onlays showed a more favorable failure mode than inlay restorations.