EC Paediatrics

Objectives: This study was undertaken to compare the fracture resistance of cast metal posts with different fibre posts in extracted teeth.

Method: Fifty intact maxillary, non carious extracted human single canaled central incisors were collected and stored in distilled water. Samples were divided into 5 groups(Group A (n = 10): Control group, Group B (n = 10): Cast metal post, Group C (n = 10): Prefabricated glass fibre post(Angelus Reforpost^®) followed by composite core, Group D (n = 10): custom fibre post(Angelus INTERLIG^®) followed by composite core and Group E (n = 10): custom fibre post(GC EverStick^®) followed by composite core.)Ten teeth used as control which received only coronal preparation and remaining 40 teeth were sectioned transversally, close to the cemento-enamel junction, leaving a root length of 13 mm and were treated endodontically to receive posts and cores.

The samples were mounted in acrylic blocks and were tested for their fracture resistance with a compression testing machine.

Results: Highest mean fracture resistance was recorded in Group A, followed by Group E, then Group D and Group C. Group B recorded the lowest mean fracture resistance. The difference in mean fracture resistance was statistically significant among all the groups (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Highest fracture resistance was recorded for Group A which was not treated endodontically and was our control group. The custom EverStick fibre post (Group E) showed the maximum fracture resistance among all other posts. The cast metal post showed the least fracture resistance among all the groups.

 Keywords: Fracture Resistance; Central Incisors; Posts

1. Cheung W. “A review of the management of endodontically treated teeth”. Journal of the American Dental Association 136 (2005): 611-619.
2. Purton DG., et al. “Effect of thermocycling on the retention of glass fiber root canal posts”. Quintessence International 34 (2003): 366-369.
3. Fokkinga WA., et al. “A structured analysis of in vitro failure loads and failure modes of fiber, metal, and ceramic post-and-core systems”. The International Journal of Prosthodontics4 (2004): 476-482.
4. Newman MP., et al. “Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with composite posts”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 89 (2003): 360-367.
5. Goracci C and Ferrari M. “Current perspectives on post systems: a literature review”. Australian Dental Journal 56 (2011): 77-83.
6. Da Costa RG., et al. “Three-Year Follow Up of Customized Glass Fiber Esthetic Posts”. European Journal of Dentistry1 (2011): 107-112.
7. Keulemans F. “Exploring the limitations of fiber reinforced composite fixed dental prostheses: Fibres (un)limited”. Research Gate (2016): 1-44.
8. Caixeta RV., et al. “Influence of glass fiber reinforcement on the flexural strength of different resin composites”. Applied Adhesion Science 3 (2015): 24.
9. Chakmakchi M., et al. “In vitro comparative assessment of fracture resistance of roots restored with Everstick fiber reinforced composite post”. The Journal on Dispute Resolution1 (2015): 43-50.
10. Dilmener FT., et al. “Resistance of three new esthetic post-and-core systems to compressive loading”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 95 (2006): 130-136.
11. Peters MCRB., et al. “Stress analysis of a tooth restored with a post and core”. Journal of Dental Research6 (1983): 760-763.
12. Franco EB., et al. “Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fiber posts of different lengths”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 111 (2014): 30-34.
13. Salameh Z., et al. “The effect of different full coverage crown systems on fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated maxillary incisors restored with and without glass fiber posts”. Journal of Endodontics7 (2008): 842-846.
14. Pereira JR., et al. “The effect of post material on the characteristic strength of fatigued endodontically treated teeth”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry (2014).
15. Assif D and Gorfil C. “Biochemical considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 71 (1994): 565-567.
16. Sorensen JA and Martinoff JM. “Intracoronal reinforcement and coronal coverage: A study of endodontically treated teeth”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry6 (1984): 780-784.
17. Rezaei A., et al. “Comparison of stresses induced by fiber post, parapost and casting post in root canals by photoelasticity method”. Iranian Endodontic Journal1 (2010): 11-16.
18. Pasqualin FH., et al. “In vitro fracture resistance of glass fiber and cast metal posts with different designs”. The Revista Odonto Ciência1 (2012): 52-57.
19. Mishra L., et al. “Rehabilitation of fractured tooth by a custom made fibre reinforced composite post”. The International Journal of Odontostomatology3 (2012): 323-326.
20. Dilmener FT., et al. “Resistance of three new esthetic post-and-core systems to compressive loading”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 95 (2006): 130-136.
21. Ferrari M., et al. “Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced epoxy resin posts and castpost and cores”. Journal of the American Dental Association 13 (2000): 15B-18B.
22. Perdigao J., et al. “The effect of dowel space on the bond strengths of fiber posts”. Journal of Prosthodontics 16 (2007): 154-164.
23. Sahafi A and Peutzfeldt A. “Durability of the bond between resin composite cores and prefabricated posts”. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 67 (2009): 271-276.
24. Terry DA and Swift EJ. “Post-and-cores: Past to present”. International Dentistry SA2 (2006): 20-28.
25. Makarewicz D., et al. “Effect of cementation technique of indivisually formed fiber-reinforced composite post on bond strength and microleakage”. The Open Dentistry Journal 7 (2013): 68-75.
26. Khamverdi Z., et al. “Effect of storage time on microtensile bond strength between quartz fiber post and composite core after different post surface treatments”. Journal of Conservative Dentistry 14 (2011): 361-365.
27. Bechir ES. “Aspects in effectiveness of glass and polyethylene fibre reinforced composite resin in periodontal splinting”. Materiale Plastice1 (2016): 104-109.
28. Freeilich MA., et al. “Development and clinical applications of a light-polymerized fiber-reinforced composite”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 80 (1998): 311-318.
29. Mannocci F., et al. “Penetration of bonding resins into fibre- reinforced composite posts: a confocal microscopic study”. International Endodontic Journal 38 (2005): 46-51.
30. Lassila LVJ., et al. “Flexural properties of fiber reinforced root canal posts”. Dental Materials 20 (2004): 29-36.
31. Narva KK., et al. “Fatigue resistance and stiffness of glass fiber- reinforced urethane dimethacrylate composite”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 91 (2004): 158-163.
32. Bitter K., et al. “Effect of silanization on bond strengths of fiber posts to various resin cements”. Quintessence International2 (2007): 121-128.
33. Meira JBC., et al. “Elastic modulus of posts and the risk of root fracture”. Dental Traumatology 25 (2009): 394-398.
34. Franco EB., et al. “Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fiber posts of different lengths”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 111 (2014): 30-34.