These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effect of Restorative Protocol on Cuspal Strain and Residual Stress in Endodontically Treated Molars.
    Author: Pereira R, Bicalho AA, Franco SD, Tantbirojn D, Versluis A, Soares CJ.
    Journal: Oper Dent; 2016; 41(1):23-33. PubMed ID: 26237644.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of the restorative protocol on cuspal strain, fracture resistance, residual stress, and mechanical properties of restorative materials in endodontically treated molars. METHODS: Forty-five molars received mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) Class II preparations and endodontic treatment followed by direct restorations using three restorative protocols: composite resin (CR) only (Filtek Supreme, 3M-ESPE), resin modified glass ionomer cement in combination with CR (Vitremer, 3M-ESPE in pulp chamber and Filtek Supreme in MOD cavity), conventional glass ionomer cement in combination with composite resin (CGI-CR) (Ketac Fil, 3M-ESPE in pulp chamber and Filtek Supreme in MOD cavity). Cuspal strain was measured using strain gauges, and fracture resistance was tested with an occlusal load. Elastic modulus (EM) and Vickers hardness (VH) of the restorative materials were determined at different depths using dynamic microhardness indentation. Curing shrinkage was measured using the strain gauge technique. The restorative protocols were also simulated in finite element analysis (FEA). The shrinkage strain, cuspal strain, EM, VH, and fracture resistance data were statistically analyzed using split-plot analysis of variance and Tukey test (p=0.05). Residual shrinkage stresses were expressed in modified von Mises equivalent stresses. RESULTS: Shrinkage strain values (in volume %) were Ketac Fil (0.08±0.01) < Vitremer (0.18±0.01) < Filtek Supreme (0.54±0.03). Cuspal strain was higher and fracture resistance was lower when using CR only compared with the techniques that used glass ionomer. The EM and VH of the materials in the pulp chamber were significantly lower for glass ionomer. The FEA showed that using CR only resulted in higher residual stresses in enamel and root dentin close to the pulp chamber than the combinations with glass ionomers (RMGI-CR and CGI-CR). CONCLUSIONS: The choice of restorative protocol significantly affected the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated molars. Using glass ionomer to fill the pulp chamber is recommended when endodontically treated molars receive direct composite restorations because it reduces cuspal strain and increases fracture resistance.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]