Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Direct or Indirect Restoration of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Central Incisors with Class III Defects? Composite vs Veneer or Crown Restoration.

PURPOSE: The aim of this ex-vivo study was to evaluate the load capacity of direct or indirect endodontically restored maxillary central incisors with Class III defects, with or without glass-fiber posts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-two extracted human maxillary central incisors were endodontically treated and bi-proximal Class III cavities were prepared. Specimens were randomly allocated to six groups (n = 12): direct restoration with composite (C); direct restoration with composite and additional glass-fiber post (CP); ceramic veneer restoration (V), ceramic veneer restoration and additional glass-fiber post (VP), ceramic crown restoration (Cr), ceramic crown restoration and additional glass-fiber post (CrP). Specimens were exposed to thermomechanical loading (TML: 1.2 million cycles, 1 to 50 N; 6000 thermal cycles between 5°C and 55°C for 1 min each), and subsequently linearly loaded until failure (Fmax [N]) at an angle of 135 degrees 3 mm below the incisal edge on the palatal side. Statistical tests were performed using the Kruskall-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-Test.

RESULTS: During dynamic loading by TML, one early failure occurred in group C, CP, and CrP. Subsequent linear loading resulted in mean fracture load values [N] of C = 483 ± 219, CP = 536 ± 281, V = 908 ± 293, VP = 775 ± 333, Cr = 549 ± 258, CrP = 593 ± 259. The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences of load capacity between groups (p < 0.05). Mann-Whitney U-test revealed significantly lower maximum fracture load values of group C compared to group V (p = 0.014), after Bonferroni-Holm correction. Non-restorable root fracture was the most frequent type of failure.

CONCLUSION: Endodontically treated maxillary central incisors with Class III defects directly restored with composite are as loadable as indirect crown restorations. Compared to full-coverage restorations, less invasive veneers appear to be more beneficial. Additional placement of glass-fiber posts shows no positive effect.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app