Background: Restoring Endodontically treated teeth (ETT) can be challenging for most dentists, particularly when a significant tooth structure is lost. Depending on the coronal tooth structure remaining and the technique used (direct or indirect), endodontic anchorage can involve either a cast post and core or a prefabricated post.
Aim: This study aimed to investigate the effect of different custom angulated, i.e.,0°,5°,10°,15° elastic glass fibre post (Everstick post) on fracture resistance of maxillary central incisors.
Materials and methods: A total of forty-eight single-rooted maxillary central incisors were selected. All the samples were decoronated 2mm above the CEJ and endodontically treated. Post-space preparation was done for all the samples using peesoreamers ranging in size from 1-3. The samples were then randomly divided into four groups (n=12) based on the different angulations, i.e., the angle between the core and the long axis of the root, with 0°, 5°, 10°, and 15° angulations, respectively. The fit of each post in the root canal was verified. Before cementation, the coronal part of each post was bent according to their respective groups. Dual-cure resin cement was used for luting the posts and cured subsequently. The fracture resistance of all the samples was evaluated using the universal testing machine after they were mounted in self-cure acrylic resin blocks. The data were analysed using One- way ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc test.
Results: Group I exhibited the highest mean fracture resistance compared to other groups. However, One-way ANOVA showed no significant differences (p=0.161) between the four groups.
Conclusion: Everstick fibre posts are a preferable alternative for maxillary central incisors with core angulations up to 15° between coronal and radicular segments as they provide better fracture resistance with a more favourable stress distribution.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Ingber FK. You are never fully dressed without a smile. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2006;18(2):59–60. https://doi.org/10.2310/6130.2006.00011.x
- Davis LG, Ashworth PD, Spriggs LS. Psychological effects of aesthetic dental treatment. J Dent. 1998;26(7):547-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(97)00031-6
- Dong JK, Jin TH, Cho HW, Oh SC. The esthetics of the smile: a review of some recent studies. Int J Prosthodont. 1999;12(1):09-19
- Toprak ME, Tuna EB, Seymen F, Gençay K. Traumatic dental injuries in Turkish children, Istanbul. Dental Traumatol. 2014;30(4):280-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12092
- Spazzin AO, Galafassi D, de Meira-Júnior AD, Braz R, Garbin CA. Influence of post and resin cement on stress distribution of maxillary central incisors restored with direct resin composite. Oper Dent. 2009;34(2):223-9. https://doi.org/10.2341/08-73
- Delivanis HP, Kuftinec MM. Variation in morphology of the maxillary central incisors found in class II, division 2 malocclusions. Am J Orthod. 1980;78(4):438-43.
- Williams A, Woodhouse C. The crown to root angle of maxillary central incisors in different incisal classes. Brit J Orthod. 1983;10(3):159-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(80)90024-X
- McIntyre GT, Millett DT. Crown-root shape of the permanent maxillary central incisor. Angle Orthod. 2003;73(6):710-5.
- Shen YW, Hsu JT, Wang YH, Huang HL, Fuh LJ. The Collum angle of the maxillary central incisors in patients with different types of malocclusions. J Dent Sci. 2012 Mar 1;7(1):72-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2012.01.010
- Haralur SB, Lahig AA, Al Hudiry YA, Al-Shehri AH, Al-Malwi AA. Influence of post angulation between a coronal and radicular segment on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(8): ZC90-ZC93. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/27965.10470
- Chakmakchi M, Rasheed R, Suliman R. In vitro comparative assessment of facture resistance of roots restored with everstick fiber reinforced composite post. Journal of Oral and Dental Research. 2015;2(1):43-50.
- Miglani A, Mangat P, Chauhan P, Tomer AK, Nagarjuna P, Rana S, Dubey S, Mullick S. Comparative Evaluation of Fractured Resistance of Different Post System in Endodontically treated Teeth: An in vitro Study. Int J Oral Care Res. 2017;5(1):61–64. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10051-0083
- Dutta A, Nadig RR, Gowda Y. To evaluate the fracture resistance of proclined endodontically treated teeth with different post and core systems: In vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2020;23(3):233-239. https://doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_366_20
- Faria AC, Rodrigues RC, de Almeida Antunes RP, de Mattos MD, Ribeiro RF. Endodontically treated teeth: characteristics and considerations to restore them. J Prosthodont Res. 2011;55(2):69-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2010.07.003
- Arora C, Aras M, Chitre V. Evaluation and comparison of retention of different aesthetic posts. J Ind Prosthodont Soc. 2006;6(2):82-89. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.27781
- Beltagy TM. Fracture resistance of rehabilitated flared root canals with anatomically adjustable fiber post. Tanta Dent J. 2017;14(2):96-103. https://doi.org/10.4103/tdj.tdj_16_17
- Cormier CJ, Burns DR, Moon P. In vitro comparison of the fracture resistance and failure mode of fiber, ceramic, and conventional post systems at various stages of restoration. J Prosthodont. 2001;10(1):26-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2001.00026.x
- Hegde V, Arora N. Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored Using Three Different Esthetic Post System. J Oper Dent Endod. 2019;4(1):10-13. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10047-0066
- Assif D, Oren E, Marshak BL, Aviv I. Photoelastic analysis of stress transfer by endodontically treated teeth to the supporting structure using different restorative techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 1989;61(5):535-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90272-2
- Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Serrao G, Dellavia C, Tartaglia GM. Single tooth bite forces in healthy young adults. J Oral Rehabil. 2004; 31:18–22. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0305-182X.2003.01179.x