title: Fracture resistance and pattern of the upper premolars with obturated canals and restored endodontic occlusal access cavities.
abstract: We studied whether obturing canals and restoring endodontic occlusal access cavities on upper premolars could provide acceptable resistance and pattern to fracture. Eighteen upper premolars were divided equally into 3 groups. Group 1 consisted of intact controls; group 2 had access cavities and root canal preparations; group 3 as in group 2 but obturated with gutta-percha and AH26, and the access cavity restored with glass ionomer and composite. Specimens were submitted to compressive strength testing using the Hounsfield Universal H50KM testing machine with a load cell of 2000 Newtons and a crosshead speed set at 1.0 mm/min until fracture. The results from the compressive strength tests showed that intact controls (1105.83±90.93 MPa) and restored premolars (936.67±44.67 MPa) were significantly different from premolars with unrestored access cavities 568.33±105.49 MPa. There was no significant difference between intact controls and restored premolars. The predominant fracture pattern for intact teeth was an oblique fracture. For premolars that had endodontic access cavities, restored or unrestored, the most common fracture pattern was a vertical fracture. The restoration of occlusal access cavities with glass ionomer and composite provided fracture resistance close to that of intact controls, but when restored teeth fractured, they were predominantly non-restorable.
authors.affiliation: Dental Research Institute, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210029, China.
authors.forename: Younong
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Wu
authors.forename: Peter
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Cathro
authors.forename: Victor
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Marino
keywords: fracture; premolar; root canal preparation
references.citation: Oper Dent. 2006 Jan-Feb;31(1):33-8
references.pmid: 16536191
references.citation: J Dent Res. 2006 Apr;85(4):364-8
references.pmid: 16567560
references.citation: J Prosthodont. 2008 Feb;17(2):114-119
references.pmid: 17971112
references.citation: J Dent. 2001 Jan;29(1):75-82
references.pmid: 11137641
references.citation: J Dent. 1996 Nov;24(6):407-10
references.pmid: 8990685
references.citation: J Endod. 1999 Jan;25(1):6-8
references.pmid: 10196835
references.citation: Int Dent J. 1991 Feb;41(1):25-32
references.pmid: 2004835
references.citation: J Endod. 1989 Nov;15(11):512-6
references.pmid: 2639947
references.citation: J Am Dent Assoc. 1990 Dec;121(6):712-5
references.pmid: 2277156
references.citation: J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Sep;98(3):186-92
references.pmid: 17854619
references.citation: J Prosthet Dent. 1984 Jun;51(6):780-4
references.pmid: 6376780
references.citation: J Am Dent Assoc. 1976 Jul;93(1):78-87
references.pmid: 777073