Atash Ramin, Arab Maiyas, Duterme Hadrien, Cetik Sibel
Department of Stomatology and Dentistry, Erasmus Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Department of Stomatology and Dentistry, Erasmus Hospital, Laboratory of Physiology and Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Medicine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2017 Jul-Sep;17(3):239-249. doi: 10.4103/jips.jips_24_17.
Our study's objective was to compare resistance to fracture between endocrown and conventional post and core restorations when subjected to shear force.
Thirty human mandibular premolars were extracted for orthodontic reasons, endodontically treated, and restored using three different methods: endocrown, glass fiber post and composite resin core, and metal post. All the crowns were made from IPS e.max ceramic. Shear forces were applied to these restorations using a test machine until breakage. Load and displacement were recorded every 0.1 s.
No significant difference was observed in resistance to fracture between glass fiber post and metal post. No relationship between the displacement of prosthetic dental system and type of material used was uncovered and by comparing the type of fracture with the restoration material used. However, a greater number of favorable fractures were observed in the glass fiber group whereas most of the fractures in the endocrown and metal post groups were unfavorable.
Endocrown displays better resistance to fracture compared to conventional post and core restorations. In addition, endocrown did not show more displacement or cause more unfavorable fractures than the conventional restorations. This restoration may represent a reliable alternative for restoring a damaged, endodontically treated tooth.
我们研究的目的是比较内冠修复体与传统桩核修复体在承受剪切力时的抗折性。
因正畸原因拔除30颗人下颌前磨牙,进行根管治疗,并用三种不同方法进行修复:内冠修复、玻璃纤维桩与复合树脂核修复以及金属桩修复。所有全冠均由IPS e.max陶瓷制成。使用试验机对这些修复体施加剪切力直至断裂。每0.1秒记录一次载荷和位移。
玻璃纤维桩与金属桩在抗折性方面未观察到显著差异。通过比较修复体的位移与所用材料类型以及骨折类型与所用修复材料,未发现修复牙系统的位移与所用材料类型之间存在关联。然而,在玻璃纤维组中观察到更多有利骨折,而在内冠组和金属桩组中大多数骨折是不利的。
与传统桩核修复体相比,内冠修复体表现出更好的抗折性。此外,内冠修复体与传统修复体相比,未表现出更多位移或导致更多不利骨折。这种修复体可能是修复受损根管治疗牙的可靠替代方法。