Cuspal reinforcement in endodontically treated molars.
This in vitro study compared the ability of horizontal pins and a dental adhesive to reinforce the facial cusps of endodontically treated mandibular molars. Seventy-two mandibular molars were divided into six groups and mounted in acrylic blocks (n = 12). In Groups 1-5 standardized endodontic access and instrumentation in the coronal one-third of each root canal were completed. In Groups 1-4 the lingual cusps were reduced, leaving the buccal cusps intact. The facial cusps of the teeth in each group received one of the following modes of reinforcement: Group 1--no reinforcement; Group 2--dentin adhesive (Amalgambond Plus); Group 3--two horizontal TMS Minim pins; Group 4--two horizontal TMS Minim pins and Amalgambond Plus. Teeth in Group 5 were prepared for and restored with a complete cuspal coverage amalgam restoration using four vertical TMS Minim pins. Group 6 consisted of intact natural teeth. Using an Instron Universal Testing Machine, the lingual slope of the facial cusp of each specimen was loaded to failure using a compressive force applied at an angle 60 degrees to the long axis of the tooth. The mean fracture strengths for all groups were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple range test (alpha = 0.05). Fracture patterns and modes of failure were also evaluated.


RESULTS
The intact teeth (Group 6) were significantly more fracture resistant than all other groups, with the exception of Group 4 (combination of pins and adhesive). Group 1 (non-reinforced teeth) was significantly weaker than all other groups. Groups 2-4 (specimens with reinforced cusps) were not significantly different from each other. The use of horizontal pins or a combination of horizontal pins plus dentin adhesive for cuspal reinforcement resulted in significantly more teeth demonstrating favorable fracture patterns than did the use of adhesives alone.


CONCLUSIONS
The buccal cusps of endodontically treated mandibular molars reinforced with a combination of horizontal pins and dentin adhesive were not significantly weaker than intact teeth. Of the restored teeth, those which had buccal cusps reinforced with horizontal pins and those treated with complete cuspal coverage amalgam restorations exhibited the most favorable restorative prognosis following cusp fracture.
Uyehara
M Y
MY
81st Dental Squadron, Keesler AFB, MS 39534, USA.
Davis
R D
RD
Overton
J D
JD
D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D003723:Dental Amalgam; D003772:Dental Pins; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000295:instrumentation*; D003799:Dental Stress Analysis; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D006801:Humans; D008334:Mandible; D008963:Molar; D019279:Resin Cements; D019228:Tooth Crown / Q000293:injuries; D014082:Tooth Fractures / Q000517:prevention & control*; D019553:Tooth, Nonvital
D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D019279:Resin Cements; D003723:Dental Amalgam