Skip to main content

Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth restored with different fiber post and core systems

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different post and core systems, CAD/CAM crown placement on fracture strength of endodontically treated mandibular premolar teeth. One hundred forty single-rooted premolar teeth were randomly divided into a control group and six experimental groups as follows: control group (Group 1); FiberSite post luting with Clearfil DC Core Plus (Group 2); RelyX Fiber post luting and core build up with Clearfil DC Core Plus (Group 3); RelyX Fiber post luting with Clearfil DC Core Plus and core build up with Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior (Group 4); specimens that received CAD/CAM crowns after the same procedures performed in Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively (Groups 5, 6, and 7). Fracture strength tests were performed, and the failure modes were recorded. Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. The highest fracture resistance was observed in the control group and among the experimental groups in Group 4. Groups 3 and 5 showed similar fracture resistance followed by Group 2. The lowest fracture resistances were seen in the samples of Groups 6 and 7. While the fracture strength of Group 2 increased after the crown placement (Group 5), the fracture strength of Group 3 and Group 4 decreased (P < 0.05). While the specimens in Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 predominantly showed favorable failure, unfavorable failure was more frequent in Groups 5, 6, and 7.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. 1.

    Bolay Ş, Öztürk E, Tuncel B, Ertan A. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with or without post systems. J Dent Sci. 2012;7:148–53.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Qing H, Zhu Z, Chao Y, Zhang W. In vitro evaluation of the fracture resistance of anterior endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fiber and zircon posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;97:93–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Pantaleón DS, Morrow BR, Cagna DR, Pameijer CH, Garcia-Godoy F. Influence of remaining coronal tooth structure on fracture resistance and failure mode of restored endodontically treated maxillary incisors. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119:390–6.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Barjau-Escribano A, Sancho-Bru JL, Forner-Navarro L, Rodríguez-Cervantes PJ, Perez-Gonzalez A, Sanchez-Marin FT. Influence of prefabricated post material on restored teeth: fracture strength and stress distribution. Oper Dent. 2006;31:47–544.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Giachetti L, Russo DS, Bertini F, Giuliani V. Translucent fiber post cementation using a light-curing adhesive/composite system: SEM analysis and pull-out test. J Dent. 2004;32:629–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Magne P, Goldberg J, Edelhoff D, Güth JF. Composite resin core buildups with and without post for the restoration of endodontically treated molars without ferrule. Oper Dent. 2016;41:64–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Radovic I, Corciolani G, Magni E, Krstanovic G, Pavlovic V, Vulicevic ZR, Ferrari M. Light transmission through fiber post: the effect on adhesion, elastic modulus and hardness of dual-cure resin cement. Dent Mater. 2009;25:837–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Leprince JG, Palin WM, Vanacker J, Sabbagh J, Devaux J, Leloup G. Physico-mechanical characteristics of commercially available bulk-fill composites. J Dent. 2014;42:993–1000.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    MegaDental. Brochure products. https://www.fibersitepost.com/depliantsgrande.pdf. Accessed 1 May 2019.

  10. 10.

    Mazzitelli C, Monticelli F, Toledano M, Ferrari M, Osorio R. Effect of thermal cycling on the bond strength of self-adhesive cements to fiber posts. Clin Oral Invest. 2012;16:909–15.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Zicari F, De Munck J, Scotti R, Naert I, Van Meerbeek B. Factors affecting the cement–post interface. Dent Mater. 2012;28:287–97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Dimitrouli M, Geurtsen W, Lührs AK. Comparison of the push-out strength of two fiber post systems dependent on different types of resin cements. Clin Oral Invest. 2012;16:899–908.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Novais VR, Rodrigues RB, Simamoto Júnior PC, Lourenço CS, Soares CJ. Correlation between the mechanical properties and structural characteristics of different fiber post systems. Braz Dent J. 2016;27:46–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Jayasenthil A, Solomon-Sathish E, Venkatalakshmi-Aparna P, Balagopal S. Fracture resistance of tooth restored with four glass fiber post systems of varying surface geometries—an in vitro study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2016;8:e44–e48.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971;32:271–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Maccari PC, Conceicao EN, Nunes MF. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with three different prefabricated esthetic posts. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2003;15:25–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Özcan M, Valandro LF. Fracture strength of endodontically-treated teeth restored with post and cores and composite cores only. Oper Dent. 2009;34:429–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Fernandes AS, Dessai GS. Factors affecting the fracture resistance of post-core reconstructed teeth: a review. Int J Prosthodont. 2001;14:355–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Cheung W. A review of the management of endodontically treated teeth: post, core and the final restoration. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005;136:611–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Guo J, Wang Z, Li X, Sun C, Gao E, Li H. A comparison of the fracture resistances of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with endocrowns and glass fiber post-core retained conventional crowns. J Adv Prosthodont. 2016;8:489–93.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Panitiwat P, Salimee P. Effect of different composite core materials on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with FRC post. J Appl Oral Sci. 2017;25:203–10.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Pereira JR, De Ornelas F, Conti PCR, Do Valle AL. Effect of a crown ferrule on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with prefabricated posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;95:50–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Nissan J, Barnea E, Bar-Hen D, Assif D. Effect of remaining coronal structure on the resistance to fracture of crowned endodontically treated maxillary first premolars. Quintessence Int. 2008;39:e183–e187187.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Tan PL, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Stanford CM, Tan SC, Johnson WT, Dawson D. In vitro fracture resistance of endodontically treated central incisors with varying ferrule heights and configurations. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;93:331–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    De Munck J, Vargas MA, Van Landuyt K, Hikta K, Lambrachts P, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding of auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater. 2004;20:963–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Al-Asaf K, Chakmakchi M, Palaghias G, Karanika-Kouma A, Eliades G. Interfacial characteristics of adhesive luting resins and composites with dentine. Dent Mater. 2007;23:829–39.

    Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Monticelli F, Osorio R, Mazzitelli C, Ferrari M, Toledano M. Limited decalcification/diffusion of self-adhesive cements into dentin. J Dent Res. 2008;87:974–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Sorensen JA, Martinoff JT. Intracoronal reinforcement and coronal coverage: a study of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 1984;51:780–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Fráter M, Forster A, Jantyik Á, Braunitzer G, Nagy K, Grandini S. In vitro fracture resistance of premolar teeth restored with fibre-reinforced composite posts using a single or a multi-post technique. Aust Endod J. 2017;43:16–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Hannig C, Westphal C, Becker K, Attin T. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94:342–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Bitter K, Meyer-Lueckel H, Fotiadis N, Blunck U, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM, Paris S. Influence of endodontic treatment, post insertion, and ceramic restoration on the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars. Int Endod J. 2010;43:469–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Cooney JP, Caputo AA, Trabert KC. Retention and stress distribution of tapered-end endodontic posts. J Prosthet Dent. 1986;55:540–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Signore A, Benedicenti S, Kaitsas V, Barone M, Angiero F, Ravera G. Long-term survival of endodontically treated, maxillary anterior teeth restored with either tapered or parallel-sided glass-fiber posts and full-ceramic crown coverage. J Dent. 2009;37:115–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Milot P, Stein RS. Root fracture in endodontically treated teeth related to post selection and crown design. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;68:428–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Santini MF, Wandscher V, Amaral M, Baldissara P, Valandro LF. Mechanical fatigue cycling on teeth restored with fiber posts: impact of coronal grooves and diameter of glass fiber post on fracture resistance. Minerva Stomatol. 2011;60:485–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Abouelleil H, Pradelle N, Villat C, Attik N, Colon P, Grosgogeat B. Comparison of mechanical properties of a new fiber reinforced composite and bulk filling composites. Restor Dent Endod. 2015;40:262–70.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Al-Omiri MK, Mahmoud AA, Rayyan MR, Abu-Hammad O. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with post-retained restorations: an overview. J Endod. 2010;36:1439–49.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Chang CY, Kuo JS, Lin YS, Chang YH. Fracture resistance and failure modes of CEREC endo-crowns and conventional post and core-supported CEREC crowns. J Dent Sci. 2009;4:110–7.

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Nam SH, Chang HS, Min KS. Effect of the number of residual walls on fracture resistances, failure patterns, and photoelasticity of simulated premolars restored with or without fiber-reinforced composite posts. J Endod. 2010;36:297–301.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Heydecke G, Butz F, Strub JR. Fracture strength and survival rate of endodontically treated maxillary incisors with approximal cavities after restoration with different post and core systems: an in-vitro study. J Dent. 2001;29:427–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Marchi GM, Mitsui FHO, Cavalcanti AN. Effect of remaining dentine structure and thermal-mechanical aging on the fracture resistance of bovine roots with different post and core systems. Int Endod J. 2008;41:969–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Naumann M, Sterzenbach G, Pröschel P. Evaluation of load testing of postendodontic restorations in vitro: linear compressive loading, gradual cycling loading and chewing simulation. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biometer. 2005;74:829–34.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This article was not funded by any institution or organization.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gülşah Uslu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Özyürek, T., Topkara, C., Koçak, İ. et al. Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth restored with different fiber post and core systems. Odontology 108, 588–595 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-020-00481-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Mandibular premolar
  • Endodontically treated teeth
  • Fiber post
  • CAD/CAM
  • Fracture resistance