60) Bream M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. clinical Evaluation Microscopy study. J Prosthet Dent. 1986 May; 55(5): 551-9.
61) Hansen EK. Effect of scotch Bond Dependent on cavity cleaning cavity Diameter and cavosurface Angel. Scand J Dent Res. 1984 Apr; 92(2): 141-7.
62) Zha D, Botsis J, Drummond JL. Fracture studies of selected dental restorative composites. Dental Mater. 1997 May; 13(3): 198-207.
63) Manhart J, Kunzelmann KH, Chen HY, Hickel R. Mechanical properties and wear behavior of light-cured packable composite resins. Dental Mater. 2000 Jan; 16(1): 33-40.
64) Pisarski H. Fracture toughness testing; [1 screen]. Avialable at URL: http: //www.twi.co.uk/content/kscsw011. Html. Accessed June 19, 2009.
65) Bonilla ED, Mardirossian G, Caputo AA. Fracture toughness of posterior resin composites. Quintessence Int. 2001 Mar; 32(3): 206-10.
66) Tantbirojin D, Versluis A, Cheng YS, D oughlas WH. Fracture toughness and microhardness of a composite: do they correlate? J Dent. 2003 Feb; 31(2): 89-95.
67) Xu HH, Schumacher GE, Eichmiller FC, Peterson RC, Antonucci JM, Muller HJ. Continuous-fiber perform reinforcement of dental resin composite restoration. Dent Mater. 2003 Sep; 19(6): 523-30.
68) Anusavice KJ. Phillips’ Science of Dental Materials. 11th ed. St Louis: Saunders; 2003. P 73; 93-94.
69) Rosa RA, Barreto MS, Rosa TA, Reis KR, Kaizer OB. Fracture resistance of weakened teeth restored using accessory glass fiber posts. Gen Dent. 2013 Mar;61(2):45-9.
70) Dikbas I, Tanalp J, Koksal T, Yalniz A, Gungor T. Investigation of the effect of different prefabricated intracanl posts on fracture resistance of simulated immature teeth. Dent Traumatol. 2013 Feb 4.
71) Costa RG, De Morais EC, Campos EA, Michel MD, Gonzaga CC, Coffer GM. Customized fiber glass posts. Fatigue and fracture resistance. Am J Dent. 2012 Feb; 25(1):35-8.
72) Ambica K, Mahendran K, Talwar S, Verma M, Padmini G, Periasamy R. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance under static and fatigue loading of endodontically treated teeth restored with carbon fiber posts, glass fiber posts, and an experimental dentin post system. J Endod. 2013 Jan;39(1):96-100.
73) Mortazavi V, Fathi M, Katiraei N, Shahnaseri S, Badrian H, Khalighinejad N. Fracture resistance of structurally compromised and normal endodontically treated teeth restored with different post systems: An in vitro study. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012 Mar;9(2):185-91.
74) Valdivia AD, Raposo LH, Simamoto-Júnior PC, Novais VR, Soares CJ. The effect of fiber post presence and restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary incisors. J Prosthet Dent. 2012 Sep;108(3):147-57.
75) Jindal S, Jindal R, Mahajan S, Dua R, Jam N, Sharma S. In vitro evaluation of the effect of post system and length on the fracture resistance of endôdontically treated human anterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Dec;16(6):1627-33.
76) Santini MF, Wandscher V. Amaral M, Baldissara P. V&andro IF. Minerva Stomatol. Mechanical fatigue cycling on teeth restored with fiber posts: impact of coronal grooves and diameter of glass fiber post on fracture resistance. 2011 Oct;60(10):485-93.
77) Silva GR, Santos-Filho PC, Simamoto-Jünior PC, Martins LR, Mota AS, Soares CJ. Effect of post type and restorative techniques on the strain and fracture resistance of flared incisor roots. Braz Dent J. 2011; 22(3):230-7.
78) Mangold JT, Kern M. Influence of lass-tihr posts on the fracture resistance and failure pattern of vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 105(6):387-93.
79) Makade CS, Meshram GK, Warhadpande M, Patil PG. A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post core systems – an in-vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont. 2011 Jun;3(2):90-5.
80) Padmanabhan P. A comparative evaluation of the fracture resistance of three different pre-fabricated posts in endodontically treated teeth: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2010 Jul;13(3):124-8.
81) Moosavi H, Maleknejad F, Kimyai S. Fracture resistance of endodontically-treated teeth restored using three root-reinforcement methods. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008 Jan 1;9(1):30-7.
82) Sorrentino R, Salameh Z, Zarone F, Tay FR, Ferrari M. Effect of post- retained composite restoration of MOD p reparations on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. Adhes Dent. 2007 Feb; 9(1): 49-56.
83) Ortega VL, Pegoraro LF, Conti PC, do Valle AL, Bonfante G. Evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars, restored with ceromer or heat-pressed ceramic inlays and fixed with dual-resin cements. J Oral Rehabil. 2004 Apr; 31(4):393-7.
84) Prisco D, De Santis R, Mollica F, Ambroslo L Rengo 5, Nicolais L. Fiber post adhesion to resin luting cements in the restoraUQn of endodontically-treated teeth.Oper Dent. 2003;28(5):515-21.
85) Purton DG, Chandler NP, Qualtrough AJ. Effect of thermocycling on the retention of glass-fiber root canal posts. Quintessence Int 2003 May; 34(5):366-369.
86) Newman MP, Yaman P, Dennison J, Rafter M, Billy E. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with composite posts. J Prosthet Dent 2003 Apr; 89(4): 360-7.
87) Tjan AH, Grant BE, Dunn JR. Microleakage of composite resin cores treated with various dentin bonding systems. J Prosthet Dent. 1991Jul; 66(1):24-9.
88) Gish SP, Drake DR, Walton RE, Wilcox L. Coronal leakage: bacterial penetration through obturated canals following post preparation. J Am Dent Assoc. 1994 Oct;125(10):1369-72.
89) Metzger Z, Schaham G, Abramovitz I, Dotan M, Ben-Amar A. Improving the seal of amalgam cores with cemented dowels: a comparative in vitro radioactive tracer study. J Endod. 2001 Apr; 27(4):288-91.
90) Thitthaweerat S, Nakajima M, Foxton RM, Tagami J. Effect of waiting interval on chemical activation mode of dual-cure one-step self-etching adhesives on bonding to root canal dentin. J Dent. 2012 Dec;40(12):1109-18.
91) Culbreath TE, Davis GM, West NM, Jackson A. Treating internal resorption using a syringeable composite resin. JADA 2000 Apr; 131(4): 493-5.
92) Purton DG, Chandler NP, Qualtrough AJ. Effect of thermocycling on the retention of glass-fiber root canal posts. Quintessence Int 2003 May; 34(5):366-369.
93) Newman MP, Yaman P, Dennison J, Rafter M, Billy E. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with composite posts. J Prosthet Dent 2003 Apr; 89(4): 360-7.
94) Peroz I, Blankenstein F, Lange KP, Naumann M. Restoring endodontically treated teeth with posts and cores- A review. Quintessence Int. 2005 Oct; 36(9):737-46.
95) Lui JL. Composite resin reinforcements of flared canals using light-transmitting plastic posts. Quintessence Int 1994 May; 25(5):313-319.


Aim: The aim of this study was fracture resistance evaluation of endodontically treated teeth with various coronoradicular restoration methods.
Materials and Methods: Sixty freshly extracted human premolars were selected and randomly divided into five groups (n=12). In 48 teeth, the crowns were cut from 3 mm above the CEJ. The MOD cavities with dimensions of 3 mm at buccolingually and the gingival margin in CEJ were prepared. After root canal treatment, in the first group, tooth color pins #1 with length approximately 8 mm were cemented in root canals with Estelite Core Quick (Tokuyama) and crown was restored with resin composite; Estelite Sigma Quick (Tokuyama). For second group the root and crown was restored integrate with adhesive; Bond Force (Tokuyama) and light cure resin composite; Estelite Sigma Quick (Tokuyama). For the third group, self-cured composite; Master Dent (USA) and the adhesive in package was used to reconstruct the crown and root. In the fourth group the Panavia F 2.0 resin cement (Kuraray) was used for cementation of tooth color posts and crown building was done with resin composites; Clearfil AP-X. In control group, (fifth group) teeth remained intact. Samples stored in distilled water at 37 ° C for 24 hours, and then the samples were at 1000 thermo cycles and were mounted in resin acrylic. Samples for fracture resistance test was placed into universal test device at a cross speed of 1 mm per minute. The fracture resistance values and failure patterns were recorded. Data were analysed by ANOVA, Tukey’s & Fisher’s Exact tests (P<0.05). Results: The fourth group had the highest and the third group had the lowest fracture resistance. It was revealed a significant difference in the mean values of fracture resistance tested groups (P<0.05). Significant differences was showed in the mean values of fracture resistance between groups 4 and 5 by other groups (P<0.05). Significant difference was not in fracture resistance among groups 1, 2, 3 (P>0.05).
Conclusion: For endodontically treated teeth, root reconstruction with fiber post and Panavia resin cement and crown building with light-cured resin composite increased fracture resistance equally to the intact teeth.
Key words: Fracture resistance, Fiber post, Resin cement, Resin composite

Mashhad University of Medical Sciences Faculty of Dentistry
Dental Materials Research Center

Fracture Resistance Evaluation of Endodontically Treated Teeth with Various Coronoradicular Restoration Methods

Advising Professor:
Dr. Horieh Moosavi

Fatemeh Manari

Academic Year: 2012- 2013 Thesis No.2600

Categories: مقالات سئو