A comparison of the fracture resistances of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with endocrowns and glass fiber postcore retained conventional crowns
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
PURPOSE. This in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistances and failure modes of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with endocrowns and conventional post-core retained crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty mandibular premolars were assigned into three groups (n=10): GI, intact teeth; GE, teeth with endocrowns; GC, teeth with conventional post-core supported crowns. Except for the teeth in group GI, all specimens were cut to 1.5 mm above the cementoenamel junction and endodontically treated. Both endocrowns and conventional crowns were fabricated from lithium-disilicate blocks using a CEREC 3D CAD/CAM unit. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling and then to 45° oblique compressive load until fracture occurred. The fracture resistance and failure mode of each specimen were recorded. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and LSD Post Hoc Test (α=.05). RESULTS. The fracture resistances of GE and GC were significantly lower than that of GI (P<.01), while no significant difference was found between GE and GC (P=.702). As of the failure mode, most of the specimens in GE and GC were unfavorable while a higher occurrence of favorable failure mode was presented in GI. CONCLUSION. For the restoration of mandibular premolar, endocrown shows no advantage in fracture resistance when compared with the conventional method. Both of the two methods cannot rehabilitate endodontically treated teeth with the same fracture resistances that intact mandibular premolars have.
Abstract
PURPOSE. This in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistances and failure modes of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with endocrowns and conventional post-core retained crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Thirty mandibular premolars were assigned into three groups (n=10): GI, intact teeth; GE, teeth with endocrowns; GC, teeth with conventional post-core supported crowns. Except for the teeth in group GI, all specimens were cut to 1.5 mm above the cementoenamel junction and endodontically treated. Both endocrowns and conventional crowns were fabricated from lithium-disilicate blocks using a CEREC 3D CAD/CAM unit. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling and then to 45° oblique compressive load until fracture occurred. The fracture resistance and failure mode of each specimen were recorded. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and LSD Post Hoc Test (α=.05). RESULTS. The fracture resistances of GE and GC were significantly lower than that of GI (P<.01), while no significant difference was found between GE and GC (P=.702). As of the failure mode, most of the specimens in GE and GC were unfavorable while a higher occurrence of favorable failure mode was presented in GI. CONCLUSION. For the restoration of mandibular premolar, endocrown shows no advantage in fracture resistance when compared with the conventional method. Both of the two methods cannot rehabilitate endodontically treated teeth with the same fracture resistances that intact mandibular premolars have.
참고문헌 (22)
- Reeh ES, "Reduction in tooth stiffness as a result of endodontic and restorative procedures", J Endod, 15, pp.512~516 (1989)
- Huang TJ, "Effects of moisture content and endodontic treatment on some mechanical properties of human dentin", J Endod, 18, pp.209~215 (1992)
- Linn J, "Effect of restorative procedures on the strength of endodontically treated molars", J Endod, 20, pp.479~485 (1994)
- Assif D, "Biomechanical considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth", J Prosthet Dent, 71, pp.565~567 (1994)
- Soares PV, "Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part I: fracture resistance and fracture mode", J Prosthet Dent, 99, pp.30~37 (2008)
- Bitter K, "Post-endodontic restorations with adhesively luted fiber-reinforced composite post systems: a review", Am J Dent, 20, pp.353~360 (2007)
- Stern N, "Principles of preparing endodontically treated teeth for dowel and core restorations", J Prosthet Dent, 30, pp.162~165 (1973)
- Hirschfeld Z, "Post and core-the biomechanical aspect", Aust Dent J, 17, pp.467~468 (1972)
- Guzy GE, "In vitro comparison of intact endodontically treated teeth with and without endo-post reinforcement", J Prosthet Dent, 42, pp.39~44 (1979)
- Sorensen JA, "Effect of post adaptation on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth", J Prosthet Dent, 64, pp.419~424 (1990)
- Schwartz RS, "Post placement and restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a literature review", J Endod, 30, pp.289~301 (2004)
- Cheung W, "A review of the management of endodontically treated teeth. Post, core and the final restoration", J Am Dent Assoc, 136, pp.611~619 (2005)
- Sivers JE, "Restoration of endodontically treated teeth", Dent Clin North Am, 36, pp.631~650 (1992)
- Gegauff AG, "Effect of crown lengthening and ferrule placement on static load failure of cemented cast post-cores and crowns", J Prosthet Dent, 84, pp.169~179 (2000)
- Biacchi GR, "Comparison of fracture strength of endocrowns and glass fiber post-retained conventional crowns", Oper Dent, 37, pp.130~136 (2012)
- Chang CY, "Fracture resistance and failure modes of CEREC endo-crowns and conventional post and core-supported CEREC crowns", J Dent Sci, 4, pp.110~117 (2009)
- Lin CL, "Finite element and Weibull analyses to estimate failure risks in the ceramic endocrown and classical crown for endodontically treated maxillary premolar", Eur J Oral Sci, 118, pp.87~93 (2010)
- Carvalho AO, "Influence of Adhesive Core Buildup Designs on the Resistance of Endodontically Treated Molars Restored With Lithium Disilicate CAD", CAM Crowns, 2016, pp.41, 76~82
- Salameh Z, "Fracture resistance and failure patterns of endodontically treated mandibular molars restored using resin composite with or without translucent glass fiber posts", J Endod, 32, pp.752~755 (2006)
- Bindl A, "Clinical evaluation of adhesively placed Cerec endo-crowns after 2 years-preliminary results", J Adhes Dent, 1, pp.255~265 (1999)
- Bernhart J, "Cerec3D endocrowns--two-year clinical examination of CAD", CAM crowns for restoring endodontically treated molars, 2010, pp.13, 141~154
- Ma J, "Photoelastic stress analysis of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post systems: normal and alveolar bone resorption cases", Dent Mater J, 30, pp.806~813 (2011)