| Literature DB >> 35966224 |
Anutara Bhaktikamala1, Wareeratn Chengprapakorn2,3, Pravej Serichetaphongse2,3.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the effect of different post materials and adaptability on fracture resistance and fracture mode of endodontically treated teeth. Materials andEntities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35966224 PMCID: PMC9371825 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9170081
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Dent ISSN: 1687-8728
Elastic modulus of mentioned materials.
| Material | Modulus of elasticity (GPa) | Number of times compared to dentin | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dentin | 18.6 | 1 | [ |
| DT Light-post® illusion® X-RO® | 15 | 0.81 | [ |
| Hi-rem prosthetic post | 60 | 3.23 | [ |
| Gold | 90 | 4.19 | [ |
| Zirconia post | 200 | 10.75 | [ |
| Metal post | 208 | 11.18 | [ |
| NX3 dual-cure resin cement | 9.5 | 0.51 | [ |
| Filtek™ Z350XT resin composite | 11.3 | 0.61 | [ |
| Built-it FR core material | 15.5 | 0.83 | [ |
Figure 1Sectioned specimens presented components in each experimental group.
Figure 2Illustration of the fracture resistance test set up: the specimen holder secured the position of each sample at 45° off-axis.
Mean and standard deviation of fracture resistance values (N) of study groups.
| Study groups |
| Mean ( | Min, max |
|---|---|---|---|
| C | 10 | 585.9 ± 28.1a | 554.9, 628.1 |
| CF | 10 | 649.5 ± 44.2bc | 593.2, 708.1 |
| PDT | 10 | 616.2 ± 39.9ab | 561.3, 677.5 |
| ADT | 10 | 679.8 ± 57.8c | 612.1, 778.5 |
| PHR | 10 | 607.2 ± 32.4ab | 572.8, 653.2 |
| AHR | 10 | 688.4 ± 56.4c | 608.4, 751.3 |
Same superscript indicated no statistically significant difference, analyzed by one-way ANOVA and tukey HSD post-hoc test (P > 0.05).
Number and percentage of failure modes observed in each experimental group.
| Study groups | Number (percentage within group) | |
|---|---|---|
| Favorable | Nonfavorable | |
| C | 8 (80) | 2 (20) |
| CF | 9 (90) | 1 (10) |
| PDT | 9 (90) | 1 (10) |
| ADT | 10 (100) | 0 (0) |
| PHR | 9 (90) | 1 (10) |
| AHR | 10 (100) | 0 (0) |
Pearson chi-square test showed no statistically significant different in failure modes (P=0.592).
Figure 3Samples with unfavorable fracture mode found in group C, CF, PDT, and PHR.