Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jun 17;16(6):225.
doi: 10.3390/jfb16060225.

The Impact of Different Fiber Placement Techniques on the Fracture Resistance of Premolars Restored with Direct Resin Composite, In Vitro Study

Reham Hesham Ibrahim  1 , Dina Wafik ElKassas  2 , Sameh Mahmoud Nabih  3 , Mennatallah Naguib Salem  1 , Rasha Haridy  2
Affiliations

The Impact of Different Fiber Placement Techniques on the Fracture Resistance of Premolars Restored with Direct Resin Composite, In Vitro Study

Reham Hesham Ibrahim et al. J Funct Biomater. .

Abstract

Fiber-reinforced composites (FRCs) are recognized for enhancing the fracture resistance of structurally compromised teeth. However, the optimal orientation and placement of fibers in direct resin composite restorations remain under debate. This study aimed to evaluate the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars with mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities restored using polyethylene fibers with different placement techniques, compared to conventional incremental composite restoration.

Methods: Sixty intact maxillary premolars were randomly assigned to six groups (n = 10). Group 1: intact teeth (positive control); Group 2: MOD cavity without restoration (negative control); Group 3: MOD cavity restored with nanohybrid composite using the incremental technique; Group 4: polyethylene fiber placed on the pulpal floor; Group 5: fiber placed circumferentially along cavity walls (wall-papering technique); Group 6: fiber placed buccolingually in an occlusal groove (occlusal splinting). Fracture resistance was assessed using a universal testing machine. Failure mode was also analyzed.

Results: Group 6 (occlusal splinting) exhibited the highest fracture resistance (1137.72 ± 316.20 N), significantly exceeding Group 3 (546.93 ± 59.89 N) and other fiber-reinforced groups (p < 0.05). Failure mode analysis revealed no significant differences between the fiber-reinforced groups and the intact teeth. Group 6 also had the highest percentage of restorable fractures (90%).

Conclusions: Incorporating polyethylene fibers, especially through occlusal splinting, significantly improves fracture resistance in MOD-restored maxillary premolars. This technique may offer a promising alternative to conventional composite restorations in structurally weakened posterior teeth.

Keywords: fiber-reinforced composite; fracture resistance; occlusal splinting; polyethylene; wallpapering.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Illustrative diagram showing: (a) cavity dimensions; and (b) cavity form.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cavity dimensions: (a) depth; and (b) width.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(a) Diagrammatic and (b) Photographic representation of nanohybrid composite, oblique incremental application technique.
Figure 4
Figure 4
(a) Diagrammatic and (b) Photographic representation of the pulpal floor application technique.
Figure 5
Figure 5
(a) Diagrammatic and (b) Photographic representation of the circumferential, wallpapering application technique.
Figure 6
Figure 6
(a) Diagrammatic and Photographic representation of (b) the occlusal groove preparation and (c) application technique.
Figure 7
Figure 7
The mean fracture resistance values in Newtons (N). Lower-case letters indicate significance between tested groups.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Failure modes (%) of the different groups used in the study (Group 1, sound; Group 2, cavity; Group 3, composite; Group 4, pulpal floor; Group 5, wallpaper; Group 6, occlusal groove.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Failure mode: (a) Restorable and (b) Non-Restorable.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sfeikos T., Dionysopoulos D., Kouros P., Naka O., Tolidis K. Effect of a fiber-reinforcing technique for direct composite restorations of structurally compromised teeth on marginal microleakage. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2022;34:650–660. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12895. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Albar N.H.M., Khayat W.F. Evaluation of Fracture Strength of Fiber-Reinforced Direct Composite Resin Restorations: An In Vitro Study. Polymers. 2022;14:4339. doi: 10.3390/polym14204339. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ilie N., Hilton T.J., Heintze S.D., Hickel R., Watts D.C., Silikas N., Stansbury J.W., Cadenaroi M., Ferracane J.L. Academy of Dental Materials guidance—Resin composites: Part I—Mechanical properties. Dent. Mater. 2017;33:880–894. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2017.04.013. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Moosavi H., Zeynali M., Pour Z.H. Fracture resistance of premolars restored by various types and placement techniques of resin composites. Int. J. Dent. 2012;2012:973641. doi: 10.1155/2012/973641. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Demarco F.F., Corrêa M.B., Cenci M.S., Moraes R.R., Opdam N.J.M. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: Not only a matter of materials. Dent. Mater. 2012;28:87–101. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.003. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources