Register Login
Open Journal Systems
Search
Vol. 7 No. 1-2 (2016)
DOI: 10.59987/ads/2016.1-2.4-10
Original Article
2022-08-11

Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with a bulkfill flowable material and a resin composite

Authors

A. Isufi, G. Plotino, G. N. Grande, P. Ioppolo, L. Testarelli, R. Bedini, D. Al-Sudani, G. Gambarini

Keywords: fracture resistance, endodontic treatment, bulk fill flowable composite, resin composite

Abstract

Aim. To determine and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with a bulk fill flowable material (SDR) and a traditional resin composite. Methods. Thirty maxillary and 30 mandibular first molars were selected based on similar dimensions. After cleaning, shaping and filling of the root canals and adhesive procedures, specimens were assigned to 3 subgroups for each tooth type (n=10): Group A: control group, including intact teeth; Group B: access cavities were restored with a traditional resin composite (EsthetX; Dentsply-Italy, Rome, Italy); Group C: access cavities were restored with a bulk fill flowable composite (SDR; Dentsply-Italy), except 1.5 mm layer of the occlusal surface that was restored with the same resin composite as Group B. The specimens were subjected to compressive force in a material static-testing machine until fracture occurred, the maximum fracture load of the specimens was measured (N) and the type of fracture was recorded as favorable or unfavorable. Data were statistically analyzed with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Bonferroni tests (P<0.05). Results. No statistically significant differences were found among groups (P<0.05). Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with a traditional resin composite and with a bulk fill flowable composite (SDR) was similar in both maxillary and mandibular molars and showed no significant decrease in fracture resistance compared to intact specimens. Conclusions. No significant difference was observed in the mechanical fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with traditional resin composite restorations compared to bulk fill flowable composite restorations.

Share on

Downloads

PDF
Authors

A. Isufi - Endodontics Unit, Department of Oral and Maxillo- Facial Sciences, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Italy

G. Plotino - Endodontics Unit, Department of Oral and Maxillo- Facial Sciences, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Italy

G. N. Grande - Department of Endodontics, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy

P. Ioppolo - Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Technology and Health Department, Rome, Italy

L. Testarelli - Endodontics Unit, Department of Oral and Maxillo- Facial Sciences, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Italy

R. Bedini - Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Technology and Health Department, Rome, Italy

D. Al-Sudani - Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

G. Gambarini - Endodontics Unit, Department of Oral and Maxillo- Facial Sciences, “Sapienza” University of Rome, Italy

License

Copyright (c) 2016 A. Isufi, G. Plotino, G. N. Grande, P. Ioppolo, L. Testarelli, R. Bedini, D. Al-Sudani, G. Gambarini

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Authors contributing to Annali di Stomatologia agree to publish their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which allows third parties to copy and redistribute the material providing appropriate credit and a link to the license but does not allow to use the material for commercial purposes and to use the material if it has been remixed, transformed or built upon.

How to Cite
Isufi, A., Plotino, G., Grande, G. N., Ioppolo, P., Testarelli, L., Bedini, R., Al-Sudani, D., & Gambarini, G. (2022). Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with a bulkfill flowable material and a resin composite. Annali Di Stomatologia, 7(1-2), 4–10. https://doi.org/10.59987/ads/2016.1-2.4-10

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>