Indian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental Research
HOME | ABOUT US | EDITORIAL BOARD | AHEAD OF PRINT | CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | INSTRUCTIONS | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISE | CONTACT
Indian Journal of Dental Research   Login   |  Users online: 256

Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size         

 


 
ORIGINAL RESEARCH Table of Contents   
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 24  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 193-198
A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth, with variable marginal ridge thicknesses, restored with composite resin and composite resin reinforced with Ribbond: An in vitro study


1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rural Dental College, Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences, Loni, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Rural Dental College, Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences, Loni, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Vaishali Kalburge
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rural Dental College, Pravara Institute of Medical Sciences, Loni, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.116676

Rights and Permissions

Background: The anatomic shape of maxillary premolars show a tendency towards separation of their cusps during mastication after endodontic treatment. Preservation of the marginal ridge of endodontically treated and restored premolars can act as a strengthening factor and improve the fracture resistance. Objectives: To evaluate the effect of varying thickness of marginal ridge on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with composite and Ribbond reinforced composites. Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty, freshly extracted, non carious human mature maxillary premolars were selected for this experimental in vitro study. The teeth were randomly assigned in to twelve groups ( n = 10). Group 1 received no preparation. All the premolars in other groups were root canal treated. In subgroups of 3 and 4, DO cavities were prepared while MOD cavities were prepared for all subgroups of group 2, the dimensions of the proximal boxes were kept uniform. In group 3 and 4 the dimensions of the mesial marginal ridge were measured using a digital Vernier caliper as 2 mm, 1.5 mm, 1 mm and 0.5 mm in the respective subgroups. All samples in groups 2.2 and all the subgroups of 3 were restored with a dentin bonding agent and resin composite. The teeth in group 2.3 and all subgroups of 4 were restored with composite reinforced with Ribbond fibers. The premolars were submitted to axial compression up to failure at 45 degree angle to a palatal cusp in universal testing machine. The mean load necessary to fracture was recorded in Newtons and the data was analysed. Results: There was a highly significant difference between mean values of force required to fracture teeth in group 1 and all subgroups of group 2, 3 and 4 (i.e., P < 0.01) Conclusion: On the basis of static loading, preserving the mesial marginal ridge with thicknesses of mm, 1.5 mm, 1 mm and 0.5 mm, composite restored and Ribbond reinforced composite restored maxillary premolars can help preserve the fracture resistance of teeth.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article

 
 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
  Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
  Reader Comments
  Email Alert *
  Add to My List *
 
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3520    
    Printed59    
    Emailed4    
    PDF Downloaded247    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 10    

Recommend this journal