Resistencia a la fractura radicular en dientes reforzados con ionomero de vidrio resino-modificado y restaurados con poste y cofia colados

Authors

  • María Elena Cuartas-Estrada Universidad de Antioquia
  • Julio César Escobar-Restrepo Universidad de Antioquia
  • Francisco César Muñoz-Rodríguez Universidad de Antioquia
  • María Catalina Castaño-Granada Universidad de Antioquia

Keywords:

Fracture, Endodontic post, Composite-modified glass

Abstract


This in-vitro study was aimed to examine how a composite-modified glass ionomer behaves when used as a reinforced cement for weak dentin walls in thirty lower first bicuspids treated endodontically and prepared for restoration with metal core and post. Those thirty teeth were randomly assigned to one of three different groups, as follows:  Group 1: ten endodontically treated teeth, restored with metal core and post.  Group 2: ten endodontically treated teeth, structurally weakened on purpose, restored with metal core and post.  Group 3: ten endodontically treated teeth, structurally weakened on purpose, reinforced with a composite-modified glass ionomer, and restored with metal core and post. Ah teeth were submitted to compressive forces, in an Instrom device, which registered the whole complex behavior in a strength vs. deformity graphic. Through non parametric statistical tests (Median, Mann Whitney), no statistically significant difference was found for the compressive force levels at which teeth fractured on every group (P < 0.05).  In spite of any physical or chemical virtue glass ionomers may have (some said to be tooth structure alike), their usefulness in destroyed zones to reinforce teeth couldn't be confirmed.

|Abstract
= 18 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))
= 27 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Messer, S., Messer, HH., Are endodontically treated teeth more brittle?. J Endodon 1992; 18 (7): 332-5.

2. Gutmann, JL., The dentin root complex: Anatomic and biologic considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 1992; 67 (4): 458-467.

3. Standlee, JP., Caputo, AA., Hanson, EC., Retention of endodontic dowels: effects of cement, dowel length, diameter, and design. J Prosthet Dent. 1978; 39: 401-105.

4. Hirschfeld, A., Stern N., Post and core - the biomechanicall aspects. Aust Dent J 1972; 17: 467-8.

5. Sivers JE., Johnson, WT., Restoration of endodontically treated teeth. Dent Clin North Am. 1992; 36 (3): 631-649.

6. Mount, GJ., Glass ionomers: A review of their current status. Oper Dent. 1999; 24: 115-124.

7. Saupe, WA., comparative study of fracture resistance between morphologic dowel and cores and a resin-reinforced dowel system in the intraradicular restoration of structurally compromised roots. Quintessence Int .1996; 27(7): 483-491.

8. Fortin, D., Vargas, MA., Swift, EJ. Jr., Bonding of resin composites to resin-modified glass ionomers. Am J Dent. 1995; 8 (4): 201-4.
9. Reeh, ES., Messer, H.H., Douglas, W.H. Reduction in tooth stiffness as a result of endodontic and restorative procedures. J Endodon. 1989; 15: 512-6.

10. Assif, D. and Gorfil, C., Biomechanical considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent.. 1994; 71 (6): 565-567.

11. Trabert, KC., Caputo, AA., Abou-Rass, M., Tooth fracture-comparison of endodontic and restaurative treatments. J Endodon 1978; 4: 341-5.

12. Trope, M., Maltz, DO., Transtad, L. Resistance to fracture of restored endodontically treated teeth. Endod Dent Traumatol 1985; 1: 108-11.

13. Johnson, ME., Steward, GP., Nielsen CJ., Hatton JF., Evaluation of root reinforcement of endodontically treated teeth. Oral surg Oral med Oral pathol. 2000; 90 (3): 360-4.

14. Barkhordar, RA., Radke, R., Abbasi, J., Effect of metal collars on resistance of endodontically treated teeth to root fracture. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 61: 676-678.

15. Kimmel, SS., Restoration of endodontically treated tooth containing wide of flared canal. New York S Dent J. 2000; 66 (10): 36-40.
16. Standlee JP., Caputo AA., Collard EW., Pollack MH., Analisys of stress distribution by endodontic post. Oral surg Oral med Oral pathol. 1972; 33: 952-960.

17. Greenfeld RS., Roydhouse RH., Marshall FJ., Schoner B., A comparison of two post systems under applied compresive- shear loads. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 61: 17-24.

18. Tjan, AHL., Whang, SB., Resistance to root fracture of dowel channels with various thicknesses of bucal dentin walls. J Prosthet Dent. 1985; 53: 496-500.

19. Chang, WC., Millstein, PL., Effects of desing of prefabricated post heads on core materials. J Prosthet Dent. 1993; 69: 475-482.

20. Fritz, UB., Finger, WJ., Uno, S., Resin modified glass ionomer cements: Bonding to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater 1996; 12:161-6.

21. Assif D., Oren, E., Marshak BL., Aviv I. Photoelastic analisys of stress transfer by endodontically treated teeth to the supporting structure using different restorative techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 61: 535-543.

Published

2020-09-18

How to Cite

Cuartas-Estrada, M. E., Escobar-Restrepo, J. C., Muñoz-Rodríguez, F. C., & Castaño-Granada, M. C. (2020). Resistencia a la fractura radicular en dientes reforzados con ionomero de vidrio resino-modificado y restaurados con poste y cofia colados. Revista Facultad De Odontología Universidad De Antioquia, 13(1), 73–78. Retrieved from https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/odont/article/view/343855

Most read articles by the same author(s)