Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.
J Endod. 2019 May;45(5):628-633. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2019.01.010. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
The aim of this study was to compare the fracture resistance of upper premolars undergoing root canal treatment that had been temporarily restored with 4 different temporary filling materials.
This study was based on 120 extracted upper premolars. Eight teeth were left intact and served as the negative control group. Mesio-occluso-distal cavities with 2 different designs were prepared for the rest of the teeth (for group 1 a width of one third of the intercuspal distance and for group 2 a width of two thirds of the intercuspal distance). Then, the endodontic access cavities were prepared, and the root canals instrumented with Revo-S rotary files (MicroMega, Besancon, France). Thereafter, a total of 16 teeth consisting of 8 each from group 1 and group 2 served as the positive control group and did not have any temporary filling material. The teeth were randomly divided into 4 subgroups (n = 12) according to the temporary filling material: Cavit G (3M ESPE, St Paul, MN), Coltosol F (Coltène/Whaledent AG, Altstätten, Switzerland), Intermediate Restorative Material (Dentsply Sirona, Konstanz, Germany), or DiaTemp (DiaDent Europe BV, Almere, Netherlands). Each specimen was then subjected to a fracture resistance test using a universal testing machine until the fracture occurred. The force required to fracture each specimen was recorded, and the data were statistically analyzed.
The negative control group showed the highest fracture resistance values compared with the other groups, whereas the positive control groups showed the lowest fracture resistance values. There were no statistically significant differences in the fracture resistance of upper premolar teeth undergoing root canal treatment among Cavit G, Intermediate Restorative Material, Coltosol F, and DiaTemp, regardless of the cavity width (P > .05).
The cavity design was found to be an effective factor on the fracture resistance of upper premolar teeth undergoing root canal treatment. The temporary filling materials tested did not affect the fracture resistance.
本研究旨在比较 4 种不同临时充填材料暂时修复根管治疗后的上颌前磨牙的抗折能力。
本研究基于 120 颗上颌前磨牙。8 颗牙保持完整，作为阴性对照组。其余牙齿制备近中-颊舌-远中窝洞，窝洞宽度分别为（1）牙尖间距离的 1/3，（2）牙尖间距离的 2/3。然后，制备牙髓腔入口，并使用 Revo-S 旋转锉（MicroMega，Besancon，法国）对根管进行预备。此后，每组 16 颗牙（每组 8 颗），分别来自组 1 和组 2，作为阳性对照组，不使用任何临时充填材料。将牙随机分为 4 组（n = 12），根据临时充填材料分为：Cavit G（3M ESPE，St Paul，MN）、Coltosol F（Coltène/Whaledent AG，Altstätten，瑞士）、Intermediate Restorative Material（Dentsply Sirona，Konstanz，德国）或 DiaTemp（DiaDent Europe BV，Almere，荷兰）。然后使用万能试验机对每个标本进行抗折强度测试，直到发生断裂。记录每个标本断裂所需的力，并对数据进行统计分析。
阴性对照组的抗折强度值最高，阳性对照组的抗折强度值最低。Cavit G、Intermediate Restorative Material、Coltosol F 和 DiaTemp 之间，无论窝洞宽度如何，根管治疗后的上颌前磨牙的抗折强度无统计学差异（P＞.05）。
窝洞设计是影响根管治疗后的上颌前磨牙抗折能力的有效因素。测试的临时充填材料不影响抗折强度。
