Fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with horizontal fiberglass posts or indirect techniques.

BACKGROUND

Because of the many possibilities for endodontically restoring the posterior teeth and the high prevalence of restoration failures, this topic continues to be of major concern. A composite resin (CR) restoration reinforced by a horizontal fiberglass post may improve the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. The authors investigated this possibility by comparing the fracture resistance of molars restored with direct techniques with that of molars restored with indirect techniques.

METHODS

The authors divided 50 extracted sound third molars into 5 groups: sound teeth, onlay (ON), inlay (IN), direct CR, and transfixed fiberglass post (TFP) plus direct CR. The authors performed standardized mesio-occlusodistal cavity preparations and endodontic treatments. The authors cemented indirect restorations of Lava Ultimate (3M ESPE) adhesively in the ON and IN groups. The authors restored CR group teeth directly with Filtek Z230 XT (3M ESPE). In the TFP group, the authors transfixed 2 fiberglass posts horizontally and restored the teeth directly with CR. Thereafter, the authors submitted the teeth to cyclic fatigue loading with 500,000 cycles at 200 newtons. The authors tested fracture resistance in newtons in a universal testing machine. The authors analyzed data with 1-way analysis of variance and a Tukey test (P < .05).

RESULTS

Sound teeth had the highest fracture resistance. ON had the highest recovery of resistance, followed by TFP. CR had the lowest recovery, which was similar to that of IN.

CONCLUSIONS

Endodontically treated molars restored with TFP plus CR had fracture resistance similar to those restored with ON, which was higher than that for IN or CR only.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Horizontal TFPs placed inside a composite restoration had the same performance as did ON restorations.