Search

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different coronal restoration techniques on fracture resistance of root canal-treated mandibular premolars with mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities., Materials and Methods: A total of 105 mandibular premolars were selected and randomly distributed into seven groups (n = 15). MOD cavities were prepared except the control group. Root canal treatments were performed. Each tooth was embedded in acrylic resin. Groups were classified as follows; G1: intact teeth (control), G2: unfilled MOD cavity, G3: MOD + composite resin, G4: 10-mm-long fiber post + composite resin, G5: 5-mm-long fiber post + composite resin, G6: Ribbond in the occlusal surface + composite resin, and G7: horizontal fiber post + composite resin. Specimens were loaded using a universal testing machine until fracture occurs. Fracture loads were recorded and statistical interpretations were made (α = 0.05)., Results: In Groups 1, 6, and 7, the greatest fracture resistance was shown and there were no significant differences among these groups (P > 0.05). No significant differences were detected among the Groups 3, 4, and 5 (P > 0.05), whereas the fracture resistances of Groups 1, 6, and 7 were significantly greater than these three groups (P < 0.05). Group 2 had the lowest fracture resistance of all groups (P < 0.05)., Conclusion: Usage of horizontal post or occlusal Ribbond usage increased the fracture resistance of root canal-treated premolars with MOD cavities., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest

Aim: This study aimed to compare the fracture resistance of roots filled with a bonded material, fiber posts, or titanium post systems., Methods: Canals in the first group were filled with AH Plus and gutta-percha cones, and roots in the second group were filled with Epiphany sealer and Resilon cones. The root fillings (60 roots) were removed up to 4 mm from the canal apex to obtain 10-mm-deep post spaces, and posts were cemented. The groups were as follows: AH Plus control group, Epiphany control group, AH Plus fiber post group, AH Plus titanium post group, Epiphany fiber post group, and Epiphany titanium post group. Fracture tests were performed by using an Instron testing machine. The force was applied at a 45° axial angle with a constant speed of 1 mm/min. For each sample, the force at which fracture occurred was recorded in units of newtons. Statistical analysis was carried out by using analysis of variance test., Results: There was no statistically significant difference between all groups (P > .05)., Conclusions: Titanium posts, fiber posts, and Epiphany root canal filling systems were found to have no reinforcing effect on endodontically treated roots., (Copyright © 2013 American Association of Endodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To compare the fracture resistance of roots filled with different materials., Methodology: Thirty-four freshly extracted human maxillary central incisor teeth with similar dimension were selected. Crowns were sectioned at the cemento-enamel junction, and the length of the roots were adjusted to 13 mm. Following the preparation of the root canals and final irrigation with EDTA and saline, the 10 root canals in group 1 were filled with Resilon cones and Epiphany sealer, the 10 root canals in group 2 were filled with gutta-percha and AH 26 and the 10 root canals in group 3 were filled with gutta-percha and MCS Canal Sealer. All materials were used with a cold lateral condensation technique. Four root canals remained unfilled and were used as a control group. Tests for fracture strength were performed using a universal testing machine and a round tip that had a diameter of 4 mm. The force was applied vertically with a constant speed of 1 mm min(-1). For each root, the force at the time of fracture was recorded in Newtons. Results were evaluated statistically with ANOVA and Tukey Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) tests., Results: The mean force of fracture values was 1043 N, 967 N, 859 N and 517.5 N for groups 3, 1 and 2 and the control group, respectively. There was a significant difference (P < 0.01) between the experimental groups and the control group. No significant differences were found between the three experimental groups., Conclusions: All the materials used in the present study reinforced the prepared root canals.

Aim: To evaluate the fracture resistance of root filled maxillary premolars restored with different techniques., Methodology: One hundred and twenty single-rooted maxillary premolar teeth were divided randomly into six groups of 20 teeth and subjected to the following procedures: group 1: intact teeth. Group 2: endodontic access cavities prepared. Group 3: MOD cavities were prepared, root canals were filled and no restoration was placed. Group 4: teeth were prepared as group 3 and restored conventionally with amalgam. Group 5: teeth were prepared as group 3 and restored with amalgam using a bonding material. Group 6: teeth were prepared as group 3 and restored with composite resin using the same bonding material. Teeth were embedded in acrylic resin and the loads for fracture strength were applied vertically with a constant speed of 1 mm min(-1). Data were evaluated statistically with anova and Tukey's tests., Results: The mean force of fracture values were 1191.41, 599.86, 233.03, 494.72, 962.81 and 856.48 N for groups 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, respectively. The fracture resistance of group 5 was similar to group 1 (P > 0.05). The mean force at fracture of group 5 and group 6 was not significantly different. The fracture resistance of groups 5 and 6 was significantly higher than group 4 (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: The group, restored with conventional amalgam, had the weakest resistance to fracture when compared with the bonded restorations. No statistically significant differences were found between the bonded amalgam and composite resin groups.