Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Simulated Immature Teeth Restored with Glass Fiber Posts, Intracanal Composite Resin, and Experimental Dentine Posts

Aim. The aim of this study was to compare the fracture resistance of simulated immature teeth restored with gutta-percha, glass fiber posts (GFP), experimental dentine posts (DP) or Intracanal composite Resin (ICR). Materials and Methods. Fifty maxillary canines were decoronated, standardized and en...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Vineeta Nikhil, Padmanabh Jha, Akarshak Aggarwal
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2015-01-01
Series:The Scientific World Journal
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/751425
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849469536246431744
author Vineeta Nikhil
Padmanabh Jha
Akarshak Aggarwal
author_facet Vineeta Nikhil
Padmanabh Jha
Akarshak Aggarwal
author_sort Vineeta Nikhil
collection DOAJ
description Aim. The aim of this study was to compare the fracture resistance of simulated immature teeth restored with gutta-percha, glass fiber posts (GFP), experimental dentine posts (DP) or Intracanal composite Resin (ICR). Materials and Methods. Fifty maxillary canines were decoronated, standardized and enlarged until, number 5 Peeso reamers were allowed to simulate immature teeth. After placement of 5 mm of MTA, the canals were divided into 5 groups and filled as follows: Group 1: AH Plus + gutta-percha, lateral compaction; Group 2: GFP luted with PARACORE dual cure resin; Group 3: DP luted with PARACORE dual cure resin; Group 4: PARACORE dual cure resin. A standardized core was built in all groups except in Group 5. Each of the specimens was tested for fracture resistance by universal testing machine. Results. The mean fracture resistance were 817 ± 27.753, 1164.6 ± 21.624, 994.4 ± 96.8747, 873.8 ± 105.446 and 493.7 ± 6.945 newtons for Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 respectively. Independent “t” test revealed statistically significant discrepancies, in the fracture resistance among the 4 groups except Group 1 and Group 4 (P<0.05). Conclusions. This study suggests that GFP and DP may be preferred for additional reinforcement of immature teeth.
format Article
id doaj-art-fd79ac740b0d443a9ea7ccb0a9e5b01d
institution Kabale University
issn 2356-6140
1537-744X
language English
publishDate 2015-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series The Scientific World Journal
spelling doaj-art-fd79ac740b0d443a9ea7ccb0a9e5b01d2025-08-20T03:25:26ZengWileyThe Scientific World Journal2356-61401537-744X2015-01-01201510.1155/2015/751425751425Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Simulated Immature Teeth Restored with Glass Fiber Posts, Intracanal Composite Resin, and Experimental Dentine PostsVineeta Nikhil0Padmanabh Jha1Akarshak Aggarwal2Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Subharti Dental College, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh 250005, IndiaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Subharti Dental College, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh 250005, IndiaDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Subharti Dental College, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh 250005, IndiaAim. The aim of this study was to compare the fracture resistance of simulated immature teeth restored with gutta-percha, glass fiber posts (GFP), experimental dentine posts (DP) or Intracanal composite Resin (ICR). Materials and Methods. Fifty maxillary canines were decoronated, standardized and enlarged until, number 5 Peeso reamers were allowed to simulate immature teeth. After placement of 5 mm of MTA, the canals were divided into 5 groups and filled as follows: Group 1: AH Plus + gutta-percha, lateral compaction; Group 2: GFP luted with PARACORE dual cure resin; Group 3: DP luted with PARACORE dual cure resin; Group 4: PARACORE dual cure resin. A standardized core was built in all groups except in Group 5. Each of the specimens was tested for fracture resistance by universal testing machine. Results. The mean fracture resistance were 817 ± 27.753, 1164.6 ± 21.624, 994.4 ± 96.8747, 873.8 ± 105.446 and 493.7 ± 6.945 newtons for Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 respectively. Independent “t” test revealed statistically significant discrepancies, in the fracture resistance among the 4 groups except Group 1 and Group 4 (P<0.05). Conclusions. This study suggests that GFP and DP may be preferred for additional reinforcement of immature teeth.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/751425
spellingShingle Vineeta Nikhil
Padmanabh Jha
Akarshak Aggarwal
Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Simulated Immature Teeth Restored with Glass Fiber Posts, Intracanal Composite Resin, and Experimental Dentine Posts
The Scientific World Journal
title Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Simulated Immature Teeth Restored with Glass Fiber Posts, Intracanal Composite Resin, and Experimental Dentine Posts
title_full Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Simulated Immature Teeth Restored with Glass Fiber Posts, Intracanal Composite Resin, and Experimental Dentine Posts
title_fullStr Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Simulated Immature Teeth Restored with Glass Fiber Posts, Intracanal Composite Resin, and Experimental Dentine Posts
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Simulated Immature Teeth Restored with Glass Fiber Posts, Intracanal Composite Resin, and Experimental Dentine Posts
title_short Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Simulated Immature Teeth Restored with Glass Fiber Posts, Intracanal Composite Resin, and Experimental Dentine Posts
title_sort comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of simulated immature teeth restored with glass fiber posts intracanal composite resin and experimental dentine posts
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/751425
work_keys_str_mv AT vineetanikhil comparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofsimulatedimmatureteethrestoredwithglassfiberpostsintracanalcompositeresinandexperimentaldentineposts
AT padmanabhjha comparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofsimulatedimmatureteethrestoredwithglassfiberpostsintracanalcompositeresinandexperimentaldentineposts
AT akarshakaggarwal comparativeevaluationoffractureresistanceofsimulatedimmatureteethrestoredwithglassfiberpostsintracanalcompositeresinandexperimentaldentineposts