Scholarlink

<p>This study aimed to evaluate the effect of three different restorations—a prefabricated glass-fiber post and zirconia crown (PGF/Zc), a polyethylene woven-fiber post and zirconia crown (PWF/Zc), or a zirconia endocrown (ZE)—on the fracture resistance of teeth after broken file removal using either an ultrasonic or a micro-retrieve and repair (MR&amp;R) system. Ninety mandibular premolar root canals were instrumented. Endodontic rotary files were intentionally fractured in the middle third of 80 teeth. Ten teeth served as a positive-control group. The broken fragments were removed from the 80 teeth and divided into two main groups: ultrasonic and MR&amp;R. The removal times and the amount of dentin loss were measured. Following removal and single-cone obturation, the teeth were divided into four subgroups (n = 10 per group): PGF/Zc, PWF/Zc, ZE, and a negative control. All zirconia restorations were cemented with a dual-curing cement. Fracture resistance was measured using a universal testing machine with force applied at a 45° angle. Statistical analysis used the non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis test with (α = 5%). No significant differences were observed between the two removal methods for file removal time or weight loss (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). The fracture resistance was numerically higher in the ultrasonic group; however, this difference was not statistically significant compared to the MR&amp;R group (<i>p</i> = 0.317). Among the restored groups, ZE restorations consistently provided higher fracture resistance than PGF/Zc or PWF/Zc restorations (<i>p</i> = 0.035). Notably, PGF/Zc exhibited the lowest resistance in MR&amp;R-treated samples. The zirconia endocrown (ZE) was the structurally superior restorative choice across all groups following fractured instrument removal.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Effect of different restorative approaches and broken instrument removal techniques on the fracture resistance of root canal-treated teeth: an in vitro study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月6日

查看全文
  • Busra Avucalmaz Bastug,
  • Durmus Alperen Bozkurt

摘要

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of three different restorations—a prefabricated glass-fiber post and zirconia crown (PGF/Zc), a polyethylene woven-fiber post and zirconia crown (PWF/Zc), or a zirconia endocrown (ZE)—on the fracture resistance of teeth after broken file removal using either an ultrasonic or a micro-retrieve and repair (MR&R) system. Ninety mandibular premolar root canals were instrumented. Endodontic rotary files were intentionally fractured in the middle third of 80 teeth. Ten teeth served as a positive-control group. The broken fragments were removed from the 80 teeth and divided into two main groups: ultrasonic and MR&R. The removal times and the amount of dentin loss were measured. Following removal and single-cone obturation, the teeth were divided into four subgroups (n = 10 per group): PGF/Zc, PWF/Zc, ZE, and a negative control. All zirconia restorations were cemented with a dual-curing cement. Fracture resistance was measured using a universal testing machine with force applied at a 45° angle. Statistical analysis used the non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis test with (α = 5%). No significant differences were observed between the two removal methods for file removal time or weight loss (p > 0.05). The fracture resistance was numerically higher in the ultrasonic group; however, this difference was not statistically significant compared to the MR&R group (p = 0.317). Among the restored groups, ZE restorations consistently provided higher fracture resistance than PGF/Zc or PWF/Zc restorations (p = 0.035). Notably, PGF/Zc exhibited the lowest resistance in MR&R-treated samples. The zirconia endocrown (ZE) was the structurally superior restorative choice across all groups following fractured instrument removal.