, Volume 106, Issue 2, pp 215–222 | Cite as

Effect of fiber post length and abutment height on fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars prepared for zirconia crowns

  • Jie Lin
  • Jukka Pekka Matinlinna
  • Akikazu Shinya
  • Michael George Botelho
  • Zhiqiang Zheng
Original Article


The purpose of this study was to compare the fracture resistance, mode of fracture, and stress distribution of endodontically treated teeth prepared with three different fiber post lengths and two different abutment heights, using both experimental and finite element (FE) approaches. Forty-eight human maxillary premolars with two roots were selected and endodontically treated. The teeth were randomly distributed into six equally sized groups (n = 8) with different combinations of post lengths (7.5, 11, and 15 mm) and abutment heights (3 and 5 mm). All the teeth restored with glass fiber post (Rely X Fiber Post, 3M ESPE, USA) and a full zirconia crown. All the specimens were thermocycled and then loaded to failure at an oblique angle of 135°. Statistical analysis was performed for the effects of post length and abutment height on failure loads using ANOVA and Tukey’s honestly significant difference test. In addition, corresponding FE models of a premolar restored with a glass fiber post were developed to examine mechanical responses. The factor of post length (P < 0.01) had a significant effect on failure load. The abutment height (P > 0.05) did not have a significant effect on failure load. The highest mean fracture resistance was recorded for the 15 mm post length and 5 mm abutment height test group, which was significantly more resistant to fracture than the 7.5 mm post and 5 mm abutment height group (P < 0.05). The FE analysis showed the peak compression and tension stress values of 7.5 mm post length were higher than that of 11 and 15 mm post length. The stress value of remaining tooth decreased as the post length was increased. Within the limitations of this experimental and FE analysis study, increasing the post length inside the root of endodontically treated premolar teeth restored with glass-fiber posts increase the fracture resistance to non-axial forces. Failure mode is more favorable with reduced abutment heights.


Fiber post Post length Abutment height Fracture resistant Finite element analysis 



This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 81300907).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Nicola S, Alberto F, Riccardo MT, Allegra C, Massimo SC, Damiano P, Mario A, Elio B. Effects of fiber-glass-reinforced composite restorations on fracture resistance and failure mode of endodontically treated molars. J Dent. 2016;53:82–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim SH, Oh TO, Kim JY, Park CW, Baek SH, Park ES. Effects of metal- and fiber-reinforced composite root canal posts on flexural properties. Dent Mater J. 2016;35:138–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hatta M, Shinya A, Vallittu PK, Shinya A, Lassila LV. High volume individual fibre post versus low volume fibre post: the fracture load of the restored tooth. J Dent. 2011;39:65–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baena E, Flores A, Ceballos L. Influence of root dentin treatment on the push-out bond strength of fiber posts. Odontology. 2017;105:170–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin J, Shinya A, Gomi H, Shinya A. Bonding of self-adhesive resin cements to enamel using different surface treatments: bond strength and etching pattern evaluations. Dent Mater J. 2010;29:425–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Effect of surface treatments on the flexural properties and adhesion of glass fiber-reinforced composite post to self-adhesive luting agent and radicular dentin. Odontology. 2016;104:60–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Franco EB, et al. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fiber posts of different lengths. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;111:30–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jindal S, Jindal R, Mahajan S, Dua R, Jain N, Sharma S. In vitro evaluation of the effect of post system and length on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated human anterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16:1627–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amarnath GS, Swetha MU, Muddugangadhar BC, Sonika R, Garg A, Rao TR. Effect of post material and length on fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars: an in-vitro study. J Int Oral Health. 2015;7:22–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Adanir N, Belli S. Evaluation of different post lengths’ effect on fracture resistance of a glass fiber post system. Eur J Dent. 2008;2:23–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cecchin D, Farina AP, Guerreiro CA, Carlini-Júnior B. Fracture resistance of roots prosthetically restored with intra-radicular posts of different lengths. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37:116–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krejci I, Mueller E, Lutz F. Effects of thermocycling and occlusal force on adhesive composite crowns. J Dent Res. 1994;73:1228–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dietschi D, Duc O, Krejci I, Sadan A. Biomechanical considerations for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review of the literature—Part 1. Composition and micro- and macrostructure alterations. Quintessence Int. 2007;38:733–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chuang SF, Yaman P, Herrero A, Dennison JB, Chang CH. Influence of post material and length on endodontically treated incisors: an in vitro and finite element study. J Prosthet Dent. 2010;104:379–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Santos-Filho PC, Veríssimo C, Soares PV, Saltarelo RC, Soares CJ, Marcondes Martins LR. Influence of ferrule, post system, and length on biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated anterior teeth. J Endod. 2014;40:119–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Akkayan B. An in vitro study evaluating the effect of ferrule length on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with fiber-reinforced and zirconia dowel systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2004;92:155–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mobilio N, Borelli B, Sorrentino R, Catapano S. Effect of fiber post length and bone level on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. Dent Mater J. 2013;32:816–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pi X, editor. Oral anatomy and physiology. 5th ed. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House; 2003. p. 38–40.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Craig R, Peyton F. Elastic and mechanical properties of human dentin. J Dent Res. 1958;37:710–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Friedman CM, Sandrik JL, Heuer MA, Rapp GW. Composition and mechanical properties of gutta-percha endodontic points. J Dent Res. 1975;54:921–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Borchers L, Reichart P. Three-dimensional stress distribution around a dental implant at different stages of interface development. J Dent Res. 1983;62:155–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lin J, Shinya A, Gomi H, Shinya A. Finite element analysis to compare stress distribution of connector of lithia-disilicate reinforced glass ceramic and zirconia based fixed partial denture. Odontology. 2012;100:96–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jie L, Shinya A, Lassila LV, Vallittu PK. Composite resin reinforced with pre-tensioned fibers: a three-dimensional finite element study on stress distribution. Odontology. 2013;101:29–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yokoyama D, Shinya A, Gomi H, Vallittu PK, Shinya A. Effects of mechanical properties of adhesive resin cements on stress distribution in fiber-reinforced composite adhesive fixed partial dentures. Dent Mater J. 2012;31:189–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Saker S, Özcan M. Retentive strength of fiber-reinforced composite posts with composite resin cores: effect of remaining coronal structure and root canal dentin conditioning protocols. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114:856–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chintapalli RK, Marro FG, Jimenez-Pique E, Anglada M. Phase transformation and subsurface damage in 3Y-TZP after sandblasting. Dent Mater. 2013;29:566–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Inokoshi M, Zhang F, Vanmeensel K, De Munck J, Minakuchi S, Naert I, Vleugels J, Van Meerbeek B. Residual compressive surface stress increases the bending strength of dental zirconia. Dent Mater. 2017;33:e147–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Aurélio IL, Marchionatti AM, Montagner AF, May LG, Soares FZ. Does air particle abrasion affect the flexural strength and phase transformation of Y-TZP? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dent Mater. 2016;32:827–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McLaren JD, McLaren CI, Yaman P, Bin-Shuwaish MS, Dennison JD, McDonald NJ. The effect of post type and length on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101:174–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sia PK, Masri R, Driscoll CF, Romberg E. Effect of locator abutment height on the retentive values of pink locator attachments: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117:283–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cano-Batalla J, Soliva-Garriga J, Campillo-Funollet M, Munoz-Viveros CA, Giner-Tarrida L. Influence of abutment height and surface roughness on in vitro retention of three luting agents. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant. 2012;27:36–41.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Magne P, Spreafico RC. Deep margin elevation: a paradigm shift. Am J Esthet Dent. 2012;2:86–96.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of The Nippon Dental University 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jie Lin
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jukka Pekka Matinlinna
    • 3
  • Akikazu Shinya
    • 2
    • 5
  • Michael George Botelho
    • 4
  • Zhiqiang Zheng
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of VIP Dental Service, School and Hospital of StomatologyFujian Medical UniversityFuzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of Crown and BridgeThe Nippon Dental University School of Life Dentistry at TokyoTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Dental Materials Science, Faculty of Dentistry, Prince Philip Dental HospitalThe University of Hong KongHong Kong SARPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.Oral Rehabilitation, Faculty of Dentistry, Prince Philip Dental HospitalThe University of Hong KongHong Kong SARPeople’s Republic of China
  5. 5.BioCity Turku Biomaterials Research Program, Department of Biomaterials Science, Institute of DentistryUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations