Influence of Access Cavity Preparation and Remaining Tooth Substance on Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth
Influence of Access Cavity Preparation and Remaining Tooth Substance on Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.joen.2018.05.012
复制
发表时间：
2018-09-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Grandini, Simone
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Corsentino, Giacomo;Pedulla, Eugenio;Grandini, Simone
简介：本研究的目的是评估根管治疗后，根管预备和剩余牙体对牙体抗折强度的影响。研究方法：选取100颗健康下颌第一、第二磨牙，分为1个对照组和9个实验组实验分为3组，每组10只：正常对照组，传统根管预备组（TEC），保守根管预备组（CEC），桁架根管预备组（TREC）。第4组，TEC + 3个残余壁;第5组，CEC + 3个残余壁;第6组，TREC + 3个残余壁;第7组，TEC + 2个残余壁;第8组，CEC + 2个残余壁;和第9组，TREC + 2个残余壁。所有受试牙均于洞体预备后进行根管治疗及修复。然后在通用加载机（Triaxial Tester T400 Digital; Controls srl，Cernusco，意大利）中加载试样以使其断裂，并以牛顿为单位记录断裂值。采用双向方差分析和Tukey事后分析进行多重比较（P < .05）。结果：完整牙的抗折强度高于所有试验组的牙。3个受试入路腔之间无统计学显著差异（P > 0.05）。不同残壁数间差异有统计学意义（P <0.05）。结论：与CEC和TEC相比，TRECs不会增加根管治疗牙齿的断裂强度。此外，近中、远中牙槽嵴的缺失会显著降低牙体的抗折强度。
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of access cavity preparation and the remaining tooth substance on the fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth. Methods: One hundred sound mandibular first and second molar teeth were selected and divided into 1 control and 9 test groups (n = 10/group) as follows: control group, intact teeth; group 1, teeth prepared with traditional endodontic access cavity (TEC); group 2, teeth prepared with conservative endodontic access cavity (CEC); group 3, teeth prepared with truss endodontic access cavity (TREC); group 4, TEC + 3 residual walls; group 5, CEC + 3 residual walls; group 6, TREC + 3 residual walls; group 7, TEC + 2 residual walls; group 8, CEC + 2 residual walls; and group 9, TREC + 2 residual walls. After access cavity preparation, all test teeth were endodontically treated and restored. The specimens were then loaded to fracture in a universal loading machine (Triaxial Tester T400 Digital; Controls srl, Cernusco, Italy), and fracture values were recorded in newtons. The data were analyzed with 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc analysis for multiple comparisons (P < .05). Results: Intact teeth were more resistant to fracture than the teeth in all the test groups. No statistically significant differences were found between the 3 tested access cavities (P > .05). Significant differences were observed between the different number of residual walls (P < .05). Conclusions: TRECs do not increase the fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth in comparison with CECs and TECs. Moreover, the loss of mesial and distal ridges reduced the fracture strength of teeth significantly.