Cargando…
A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study
AIM: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four intraorifice barriers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty extracted single-rooted mandibular premolars were selected, decoronated, and prepared with rotary Protaper universal system and...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7537759/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33082655 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_227_19 |
_version_ | 1783590729637953536 |
---|---|
author | Chauhan, Parul Garg, Ashima Mittal, Rakesh Kumar, Hemashi |
author_facet | Chauhan, Parul Garg, Ashima Mittal, Rakesh Kumar, Hemashi |
author_sort | Chauhan, Parul |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four intraorifice barriers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty extracted single-rooted mandibular premolars were selected, decoronated, and prepared with rotary Protaper universal system and obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. Samples were divided into five groups (n = 10) on the basis of intraorifice barrier material used. Group 1: Biodentine, Group 2: Conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC), Group 3: Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), Group 4: Nanohybrid composite, Group 5: No barrier (control).Except for control specimens, coronal 3-mm gutta-percha was removed and filled with different intraorifice barrier materials in respective groups. Fracture resistance of specimens was tested using universal testing machine. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: One-way analysis of variance test and Post hoc Tukey's test. RESULTS: Mean fracture resistance of all experimental groups (with intraorifice barriers placed) were higher than control group (no intraorifice barrier placed). Biodentine showed the highest mean fracture resistance while RMGIC showed the least and the difference between their mean fracture resistance was statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference among other experimental groups. CONCLUSION: Placement of intraorifice barriers in endodontically treated teeth can significantly increase fracture resistance and this increase in fracture resistance is material dependent. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7537759 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer - Medknow |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75377592020-10-19 A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study Chauhan, Parul Garg, Ashima Mittal, Rakesh Kumar, Hemashi J Conserv Dent Original Article AIM: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four intraorifice barriers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty extracted single-rooted mandibular premolars were selected, decoronated, and prepared with rotary Protaper universal system and obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. Samples were divided into five groups (n = 10) on the basis of intraorifice barrier material used. Group 1: Biodentine, Group 2: Conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC), Group 3: Resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), Group 4: Nanohybrid composite, Group 5: No barrier (control).Except for control specimens, coronal 3-mm gutta-percha was removed and filled with different intraorifice barrier materials in respective groups. Fracture resistance of specimens was tested using universal testing machine. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: One-way analysis of variance test and Post hoc Tukey's test. RESULTS: Mean fracture resistance of all experimental groups (with intraorifice barriers placed) were higher than control group (no intraorifice barrier placed). Biodentine showed the highest mean fracture resistance while RMGIC showed the least and the difference between their mean fracture resistance was statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference among other experimental groups. CONCLUSION: Placement of intraorifice barriers in endodontically treated teeth can significantly increase fracture resistance and this increase in fracture resistance is material dependent. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019 2020-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7537759/ /pubmed/33082655 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_227_19 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Chauhan, Parul Garg, Ashima Mittal, Rakesh Kumar, Hemashi A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study |
title | A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study |
title_full | A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study |
title_fullStr | A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study |
title_short | A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: An in vitro study |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using four different intraorifice barriers: an in vitro study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7537759/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33082655 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_227_19 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chauhanparul acomparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofendodonticallytreatedteethusingfourdifferentintraorificebarriersaninvitrostudy AT gargashima acomparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofendodonticallytreatedteethusingfourdifferentintraorificebarriersaninvitrostudy AT mittalrakesh acomparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofendodonticallytreatedteethusingfourdifferentintraorificebarriersaninvitrostudy AT kumarhemashi acomparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofendodonticallytreatedteethusingfourdifferentintraorificebarriersaninvitrostudy AT chauhanparul comparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofendodonticallytreatedteethusingfourdifferentintraorificebarriersaninvitrostudy AT gargashima comparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofendodonticallytreatedteethusingfourdifferentintraorificebarriersaninvitrostudy AT mittalrakesh comparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofendodonticallytreatedteethusingfourdifferentintraorificebarriersaninvitrostudy AT kumarhemashi comparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofendodonticallytreatedteethusingfourdifferentintraorificebarriersaninvitrostudy |