Fracture resistance of maxillary premolars restored with direct and indirect adhesive techniques
- PMID: 16202199
Fracture resistance of maxillary premolars restored with direct and indirect adhesive techniques
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the fracture resistance of teeth restored using 2 intracoronal direct and indirect adhesive techniques.
Methods: Forty maxillary premolars were divided randomly into 4 groups of 10: group 1, intact teeth; group 2, mesio-occlusodistal (MOD) cavity preparation associated with endodontic therapy (unrestored); group 3, MOD cavity preparation and restoration with direct composite resin (Z100, 3M ESPE); and group 4, MOD cavity preparation and restoration with indirect ceramic inlay (IPS Empress, Ivoclar-Vivadent). Specimens were subsequently submitted to an axial compression test, using an 8-mm diameter steel ball at a loading speed of 0.5 mm per minute, until their fracture.
Results: The average compression force causing cuspal fracture in the 4 experimental groups was group 1, 138.4 kg; group 2, 49.0 kg; group 3, 105.4 kg; and group 4, 82.7 kg. ANOVA analysis and Tukey tests showed that cavity preparation significantly weakened the remaining tooth structure. The fracture resistance of teeth restored using direct composite resin was not significantly different from that of teeth restored with ceramic inlays (p > 0.05). None of the materials tested was able to restore completely the fracture resistance lost during cavity preparation.
Conclusions: Cavity preparation significantly weakens the remaining tooth structure. Direct and indirect intracoronal adhesive restorations can partly restore fracture resistance of teeth weakened by wide cavity preparation.
Similar articles
-
Fracture resistance of teeth directly and indirectly restored with composite resin and indirectly restored with ceramic materials.Am J Dent. 2002 Dec;15(6):389-94. Am J Dent. 2002. PMID: 12691276
-
Fracture resistance of thermal cycled and endodontically treated premolars with adhesive restorations.J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Sep;98(3):186-92. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60054-7. J Prosthet Dent. 2007. PMID: 17854619
-
Effect of restoration method on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars.Int J Prosthodont. 2004 Jan-Feb;17(1):94-8. Int J Prosthodont. 2004. PMID: 15008239
-
Bonded restorations for the prevention and treatment of the cracked-tooth syndrome.Am J Dent. 1999 Dec;12(6):266-70. Am J Dent. 1999. PMID: 10850244 Review.
-
Fractures of posterior teeth: a review and analysis of associated factors.Prim Dent Care. 1995 Mar;2(1):6-10. Prim Dent Care. 1995. PMID: 8941787 Review.
Cited by
-
Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Fiber-Reinforced Composite and Alkasite Restoration in Class I Cavity.Contemp Clin Dent. 2022 Jan-Mar;13(1):56-60. doi: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_707_20. Epub 2022 Mar 23. Contemp Clin Dent. 2022. PMID: 35466303 Free PMC article.
-
The impact of passive ultrasonic irrigation on the bond strength of two different self-etch adhesives to human pulp chamber dentine: a laboratory investigation.BMC Oral Health. 2025 Apr 11;25(1):550. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-05858-x. BMC Oral Health. 2025. PMID: 40217206 Free PMC article.
-
Influence of Direct Coronal Restoration Materials on the Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Premolars: An In Vitro Study.Dent J (Basel). 2024 Sep 19;12(9):294. doi: 10.3390/dj12090294. Dent J (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39329861 Free PMC article.
-
Fracture resistance of bonded ceramic overlay restorations prepared in various designs.Sci Rep. 2022 Oct 5;12(1):16599. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-21167-7. Sci Rep. 2022. PMID: 36198863 Free PMC article.
-
An in vitro investigation on the reinforcing potential of contemporary composites in weakened bicuspids.J Conserv Dent. 2021 Nov-Dec;24(6):589-593. doi: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_279_21. Epub 2022 Apr 1. J Conserv Dent. 2021. PMID: 35558663 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources