AIM: The aim of this study was to assess fracture resistances of simulated immature single-rooted teeth whose roots have been backfilled using 3 different post systems after a 4 mm apical mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight maxillary anterior teeth were assigned into four groups. The lengths of each root were standardized by cutting off the coronal and apical portions to obtain 13 ± 1 mm samples and root canals were enlarged. The #6 Peeso reamers were allowed to protrude 1 mm beyond apex to simulate immature teeth. Apical 4 mm of each tooth was filled using MTA. The remaining portions were treated as follows: Group 1 (Control): AH Plus + Gutta-percha cold lateral compaction. Group 2: Glass fiber posts (FRC Postec Plus post) cemented using self-adhesive resin cement. Group 3: Quartz fiber posts (D.T. Light post) cemented using self-adhesive resin cement. Group 4: Zirconia posts (Cosmopost) were placed using self-adhesive resin cement. Specimens were embedded in self-curing acrylic. A compressive load was applied lingually at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min at an angle of 45º until fracture in a universal testing machine. RESULTS: The mean fracture resistances were 823.17 ± 188.80, 1155.50 ± 190.37, 1208.00 ± 254.32, and 1153.25 ± 195.71 Newtons for Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. All experimental groups had significantly higher fracture resistance compared with the control group (P < 0.01). No statistically significant difference was noted between the experimental groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: All post systems exerted a similar reinforcing effect to a simulated immature tooth and may be preferred specifically in situations which require additional reinforcement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dikbaş et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: