Background: To compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary incisors restored with single versus bundled glass fiber-reinforced composite resin posts (FRC). Material and Methods: Twenty-four maxillary incisors underwent root canal preparation (1.5-mm-diameter post spaces after canal obturation). Teeth were randomly divided into two groups (n = 12). Two different FRC groups were used for the intracanal post treatment. Single FRC (Rebilda Post system, 1.5 mm diameter) and bundled FRC (Rebilda Post GT, 12 fiber bundles, 1.4 mm diameter) were bonded to the prepared canals using dual-cure resin-based luting cement. Specimens were kept in humid at 37°C for one day. The fracture resistance testing was performed using universal testing machine by applying a compressive static load at a 135° angel to the axis of the teeth. The failure type after fracture was examined by visual inspection. Results: The fracture resistance of teeth with single FRC (Rebilda Post) and bundled FRC (Rebilda Post GT) were 787 ± 156 and 850 ± 166 Newton, respectively. There was no statistical significant difference between the two groups. Root fracture was the major failure type in both groups. Conclusions: The fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary incisors with bundled FRC (Rebilda Post GT) did not differ from incisors with single FRC (Rebilda Post). Key words:Endodontically-treated teeth, fracture resistance, glass fiber post, intracanal post. Copyright:
Background: To compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary incisors restored with single versus bundled glass fiber-reinforced composite resin posts (FRC). Material and Methods: Twenty-four maxillary incisors underwent root canal preparation (1.5-mm-diameter post spaces after canal obturation). Teeth were randomly divided into two groups (n = 12). Two different FRC groups were used for the intracanal post treatment. Single FRC (Rebilda Post system, 1.5 mm diameter) and bundled FRC (Rebilda Post GT, 12 fiber bundles, 1.4 mm diameter) were bonded to the prepared canals using dual-cure resin-based luting cement. Specimens were kept in humid at 37°C for one day. The fracture resistance testing was performed using universal testing machine by applying a compressive static load at a 135° angel to the axis of the teeth. The failure type after fracture was examined by visual inspection. Results: The fracture resistance of teeth with single FRC (Rebilda Post) and bundled FRC (Rebilda Post GT) were 787 ± 156 and 850 ± 166 Newton, respectively. There was no statistical significant difference between the two groups. Root fracture was the major failure type in both groups. Conclusions: The fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary incisors with bundled FRC (Rebilda Post GT) did not differ from incisors with single FRC (Rebilda Post). Key words:Endodontically-treated teeth, fracture resistance, glass fiber post, intracanal post. Copyright:
Authors: Josete B C Meira; Camila O M Espósito; Mayra F Z Quitero; Isis A V P Poiate; Carmem Silvia C Pfeifer; Carina B Tanaka; Rafael Y Ballester Journal: Dent Traumatol Date: 2009-05-06 Impact factor: 3.333