In-vitro evaluation shows nanoceramic composite has superior fracture resistance in endodontically treated teeth, indicating material choice is crucial.
Introduction: Restoring endodontically treated maxillary premolars is challenging due to their weakened state from caries, trauma, and the endodontic access itself, making them prone to fracture. Long-term success hinges on their ability to withstand biting forces. The core build-up, replacing lost tooth structure, is crucial. The restorative materials chosen for both the core and final crown significantly influence the tooth’s overall fracture resistance, as their mechanical properties dictate stress response. Aim: To evaluate the fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolar teeth restored with Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC), GIC with fibres and nanoceramic composite restorative material. Materials and Methods: The present in-vitro study included eighty maxillary premolar teeth which were extracted due to orthodontic purpose were collected and divided into four groups with 20 teeth in each group. Group I was noted as negative control with no preparation. Groups II, III and IV were restored with GIC, GIC with fibres and with nanoceramic composite, respectively. After restoration, the samples were subjected to evaluation of fracture resistance by using universal testing machine and values were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: The highest fracture resistance of 913.858 N(newtons) was noted for nanoceramic composite. There was no statistically significant difference observed between Groups III and IV (p=0.9870); however, both groups exhibited higher fracture resistance compared to Group II. Conclusion: The fracture resistance with fibre reinforcement was higher than conventional CIC and similar to that of nanoceramic composite.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kapu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: