Cargando…

The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars

BACKGROUND: The study investigated the fracture resistance of root-filled maxillary premolars with class II cavities restored by different restorations. METHODS: A total of 55 intact maxillary premolar teeth were included (n = 11). G1 as positive control group, 44 teeth underwent root canal treatmen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Göktürk, Hakan, Karaarslan, Emine Şirin, Tekin, Elif, Hologlu, Bilal, Sarıkaya, Işıl
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6267872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30497451
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0663-7
_version_ 1783376169034317824
author Göktürk, Hakan
Karaarslan, Emine Şirin
Tekin, Elif
Hologlu, Bilal
Sarıkaya, Işıl
author_facet Göktürk, Hakan
Karaarslan, Emine Şirin
Tekin, Elif
Hologlu, Bilal
Sarıkaya, Işıl
author_sort Göktürk, Hakan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The study investigated the fracture resistance of root-filled maxillary premolars with class II cavities restored by different restorations. METHODS: A total of 55 intact maxillary premolar teeth were included (n = 11). G1 as positive control group, 44 teeth underwent root canal treatment, and MOD cavities were prepared. (G2) no restoration, (G3) direct composite restoration, (G4) direct composite strengthened with buccal to lingual pre-impregnated glass-fibers and (G5) ceramic inlay restoration. After thermocycling, fracture resistance test was performed and fracture type was recorded. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Chisquare test. RESULTS: The mean fracture resistance was as follows: G1 had the highest fracture resistance, G2 had the lowest (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the fracture resistance values of the groups that underwent different restorations (G3, G4, G5) (p > 0.05). According to fracture type, the groups showed similar results (p > 0.05). A significant level of unrestorable fracture was detected in G5 (ceramic inlay) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: All of the restoration techniques investigated herein increased the fracture strength of teeth; however, all of these values were lower than the fracture resistance of intact teeth. There were no significant differences between the fracture resistance values of the groups that underwent different restorations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6267872
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62678722018-12-05 The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars Göktürk, Hakan Karaarslan, Emine Şirin Tekin, Elif Hologlu, Bilal Sarıkaya, Işıl BMC Oral Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The study investigated the fracture resistance of root-filled maxillary premolars with class II cavities restored by different restorations. METHODS: A total of 55 intact maxillary premolar teeth were included (n = 11). G1 as positive control group, 44 teeth underwent root canal treatment, and MOD cavities were prepared. (G2) no restoration, (G3) direct composite restoration, (G4) direct composite strengthened with buccal to lingual pre-impregnated glass-fibers and (G5) ceramic inlay restoration. After thermocycling, fracture resistance test was performed and fracture type was recorded. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Chisquare test. RESULTS: The mean fracture resistance was as follows: G1 had the highest fracture resistance, G2 had the lowest (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the fracture resistance values of the groups that underwent different restorations (G3, G4, G5) (p > 0.05). According to fracture type, the groups showed similar results (p > 0.05). A significant level of unrestorable fracture was detected in G5 (ceramic inlay) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: All of the restoration techniques investigated herein increased the fracture strength of teeth; however, all of these values were lower than the fracture resistance of intact teeth. There were no significant differences between the fracture resistance values of the groups that underwent different restorations. BioMed Central 2018-11-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6267872/ /pubmed/30497451 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0663-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Göktürk, Hakan
Karaarslan, Emine Şirin
Tekin, Elif
Hologlu, Bilal
Sarıkaya, Işıl
The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars
title The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars
title_full The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars
title_fullStr The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars
title_full_unstemmed The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars
title_short The effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars
title_sort effect of the different restorations on fracture resistance of root-filled premolars
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6267872/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30497451
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0663-7
work_keys_str_mv AT gokturkhakan theeffectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT karaarslaneminesirin theeffectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT tekinelif theeffectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT hologlubilal theeffectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT sarıkayaisıl theeffectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT gokturkhakan effectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT karaarslaneminesirin effectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT tekinelif effectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT hologlubilal effectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars
AT sarıkayaisıl effectofthedifferentrestorationsonfractureresistanceofrootfilledpremolars