Limits...
Influence of modification in core building procedure on fracture strength and failure patterns of premolars restored with fiber post and composite core.

Kim YH, Lee JH - J Adv Prosthodont (2012)

Bottom Line: The data were analyzed with MANOVA (α = .05).The failure pattern was observed and classified as either favorable (allowing repair) or unfavorable (not allowing repair).The change of post or core foundation method does not appear to influence the fracture strength and failure patterns.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, Cheonan, Korea.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The influence of the modified process in the fiber-reinforced post and resin core foundation treatment on the fracture resistance and failure pattern of premolar was tested in this study.

Materials and methods: Thirty-six human mandibular premolars were divided into 4 groups (n = 9). In group DCT, the quartz fibre post (D.T. Light-post) was cemented with resin cement (DUO-LINK) and a core foundation was formed with composite resin (LIGHT-CORE). In group DMO and DMT, resin cement (DUO-LINK) was used for post (D.T. Light-post) cementation and core foundation; in group DMO, these procedures were performed simultaneously in one step, while DMT group was accomplished in separated two steps. In group LCT, the glass fiber post (LuxaPost) cementation and core foundation was accomplished with composite resin (LuxaCore-Dual) in separated procedures. Tooth were prepared with 2 mm ferrule and restored with nickel-chromium crowns. A static loading test was carried out and loads were applied to the buccal surface of the buccal cusp at a 45 degree inclination to the long axis of the tooth until failure occurred. The data were analyzed with MANOVA (α = .05). The failure pattern was observed and classified as either favorable (allowing repair) or unfavorable (not allowing repair).

Results: The mean fracture strength was highest in group DCT followed in descending order by groups DMO, DMT, and LCT. However, there were no significant differences in fracture strength between the groups. A higher prevalence of favorable fractures was detected in group DMT but there were no significant differences between the groups.

Conclusion: The change of post or core foundation method does not appear to influence the fracture strength and failure patterns.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Failure patterns of specimens. A: Core fracture, B: Core-root fracture, C: Favorable root fracture, D: Unfavorable root fracture.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3303919&req=5

Figure 2: Failure patterns of specimens. A: Core fracture, B: Core-root fracture, C: Favorable root fracture, D: Unfavorable root fracture.

Mentions: The specimens were fixed in the universal testing machine (Instron 8871; Instron Ltd, High Wycombe, Bucks, UK) and loaded with a compressive force applied at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until specimen failure occurred. The loading force was directed perpendicular to the buccal inclination of buccal cusp of the crown and 135 degrees to specimen's long axis. The measurements were recorded in Newtons (N) and failure patterns were observed with naked eyes after the fracture strength tests. The locations of the fracture lines were confirmed by separating the fractured fragments from the acrylic resin blocks. As illustrated in Fig. 2, core fracture (A), core-root fracture (B), and root fracture superior to the resin block (C) were classified as favorable fractures which allow repair. Root fractures inferior to the resin block (D) were regarded as unfavorable ones which does not allow repair. The correlation between tooth size (B-L, M-D diameter) and fracture aspects (fracture strength and pattern) were evaluated statistically to find any significant influencing factors.


Influence of modification in core building procedure on fracture strength and failure patterns of premolars restored with fiber post and composite core.

Kim YH, Lee JH - J Adv Prosthodont (2012)

Failure patterns of specimens. A: Core fracture, B: Core-root fracture, C: Favorable root fracture, D: Unfavorable root fracture.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3303919&req=5

Figure 2: Failure patterns of specimens. A: Core fracture, B: Core-root fracture, C: Favorable root fracture, D: Unfavorable root fracture.
Mentions: The specimens were fixed in the universal testing machine (Instron 8871; Instron Ltd, High Wycombe, Bucks, UK) and loaded with a compressive force applied at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min until specimen failure occurred. The loading force was directed perpendicular to the buccal inclination of buccal cusp of the crown and 135 degrees to specimen's long axis. The measurements were recorded in Newtons (N) and failure patterns were observed with naked eyes after the fracture strength tests. The locations of the fracture lines were confirmed by separating the fractured fragments from the acrylic resin blocks. As illustrated in Fig. 2, core fracture (A), core-root fracture (B), and root fracture superior to the resin block (C) were classified as favorable fractures which allow repair. Root fractures inferior to the resin block (D) were regarded as unfavorable ones which does not allow repair. The correlation between tooth size (B-L, M-D diameter) and fracture aspects (fracture strength and pattern) were evaluated statistically to find any significant influencing factors.

Bottom Line: The data were analyzed with MANOVA (α = .05).The failure pattern was observed and classified as either favorable (allowing repair) or unfavorable (not allowing repair).The change of post or core foundation method does not appear to influence the fracture strength and failure patterns.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University, Cheonan, Korea.

ABSTRACT

Purpose: The influence of the modified process in the fiber-reinforced post and resin core foundation treatment on the fracture resistance and failure pattern of premolar was tested in this study.

Materials and methods: Thirty-six human mandibular premolars were divided into 4 groups (n = 9). In group DCT, the quartz fibre post (D.T. Light-post) was cemented with resin cement (DUO-LINK) and a core foundation was formed with composite resin (LIGHT-CORE). In group DMO and DMT, resin cement (DUO-LINK) was used for post (D.T. Light-post) cementation and core foundation; in group DMO, these procedures were performed simultaneously in one step, while DMT group was accomplished in separated two steps. In group LCT, the glass fiber post (LuxaPost) cementation and core foundation was accomplished with composite resin (LuxaCore-Dual) in separated procedures. Tooth were prepared with 2 mm ferrule and restored with nickel-chromium crowns. A static loading test was carried out and loads were applied to the buccal surface of the buccal cusp at a 45 degree inclination to the long axis of the tooth until failure occurred. The data were analyzed with MANOVA (α = .05). The failure pattern was observed and classified as either favorable (allowing repair) or unfavorable (not allowing repair).

Results: The mean fracture strength was highest in group DCT followed in descending order by groups DMO, DMT, and LCT. However, there were no significant differences in fracture strength between the groups. A higher prevalence of favorable fractures was detected in group DMT but there were no significant differences between the groups.

Conclusion: The change of post or core foundation method does not appear to influence the fracture strength and failure patterns.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus