The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different post and core systems, CAD/CAM crown placement on fracture strength of endodontically treated mandibular premolar teeth. One hundred forty single-rooted premolar teeth were randomly divided into a control group and six experimental groups as follows: control group (Group 1); FiberSite post luting with Clearfil DC Core Plus (Group 2); RelyX Fiber post luting and core build up with Clearfil DC Core Plus (Group 3); RelyX Fiber post luting with Clearfil DC Core Plus and core build up with Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior (Group 4); specimens that received CAD/CAM crowns after the same procedures performed in Groups 2, 3, and 4, respectively (Groups 5, 6, and 7). Fracture strength tests were performed, and the failure modes were recorded. Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. The highest fracture resistance was observed in the control group and among the experimental groups in Group 4. Groups 3 and 5 showed similar fracture resistance followed by Group 2. The lowest fracture resistances were seen in the samples of Groups 6 and 7. While the fracture strength of Group 2 increased after the crown placement (Group 5), the fracture strength of Group 3 and Group 4 decreased (P < 0.05). While the specimens in Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 predominantly showed favorable failure, unfavorable failure was more frequent in Groups 5, 6, and 7.
Mandibular premolar Endodontically treated teeth Fiber post CAD/CAM Fracture resistance
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
This article was not funded by any institution or organization.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
Bolay Ş, Öztürk E, Tuncel B, Ertan A. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with or without post systems. J Dent Sci. 2012;7:148–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qing H, Zhu Z, Chao Y, Zhang W. In vitro evaluation of the fracture resistance of anterior endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fiber and zircon posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2007;97:93–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Pantaleón DS, Morrow BR, Cagna DR, Pameijer CH, Garcia-Godoy F. Influence of remaining coronal tooth structure on fracture resistance and failure mode of restored endodontically treated maxillary incisors. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119:390–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barjau-Escribano A, Sancho-Bru JL, Forner-Navarro L, Rodríguez-Cervantes PJ, Perez-Gonzalez A, Sanchez-Marin FT. Influence of prefabricated post material on restored teeth: fracture strength and stress distribution. Oper Dent. 2006;31:47–544.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Giachetti L, Russo DS, Bertini F, Giuliani V. Translucent fiber post cementation using a light-curing adhesive/composite system: SEM analysis and pull-out test. J Dent. 2004;32:629–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Magne P, Goldberg J, Edelhoff D, Güth JF. Composite resin core buildups with and without post for the restoration of endodontically treated molars without ferrule. Oper Dent. 2016;41:64–75.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Radovic I, Corciolani G, Magni E, Krstanovic G, Pavlovic V, Vulicevic ZR, Ferrari M. Light transmission through fiber post: the effect on adhesion, elastic modulus and hardness of dual-cure resin cement. Dent Mater. 2009;25:837–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Leprince JG, Palin WM, Vanacker J, Sabbagh J, Devaux J, Leloup G. Physico-mechanical characteristics of commercially available bulk-fill composites. J Dent. 2014;42:993–1000.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Mazzitelli C, Monticelli F, Toledano M, Ferrari M, Osorio R. Effect of thermal cycling on the bond strength of self-adhesive cements to fiber posts. Clin Oral Invest. 2012;16:909–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zicari F, De Munck J, Scotti R, Naert I, Van Meerbeek B. Factors affecting the cement–post interface. Dent Mater. 2012;28:287–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitrouli M, Geurtsen W, Lührs AK. Comparison of the push-out strength of two fiber post systems dependent on different types of resin cements. Clin Oral Invest. 2012;16:899–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novais VR, Rodrigues RB, Simamoto Júnior PC, Lourenço CS, Soares CJ. Correlation between the mechanical properties and structural characteristics of different fiber post systems. Braz Dent J. 2016;27:46–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Jayasenthil A, Solomon-Sathish E, Venkatalakshmi-Aparna P, Balagopal S. Fracture resistance of tooth restored with four glass fiber post systems of varying surface geometries—an in vitro study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2016;8:e44–e48.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1971;32:271–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maccari PC, Conceicao EN, Nunes MF. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with three different prefabricated esthetic posts. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2003;15:25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özcan M, Valandro LF. Fracture strength of endodontically-treated teeth restored with post and cores and composite cores only. Oper Dent. 2009;34:429–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandes AS, Dessai GS. Factors affecting the fracture resistance of post-core reconstructed teeth: a review. Int J Prosthodont. 2001;14:355–63.Google Scholar
Cheung W. A review of the management of endodontically treated teeth: post, core and the final restoration. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005;136:611–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo J, Wang Z, Li X, Sun C, Gao E, Li H. A comparison of the fracture resistances of endodontically treated mandibular premolars restored with endocrowns and glass fiber post-core retained conventional crowns. J Adv Prosthodont. 2016;8:489–93.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Panitiwat P, Salimee P. Effect of different composite core materials on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with FRC post. J Appl Oral Sci. 2017;25:203–10.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Pereira JR, De Ornelas F, Conti PCR, Do Valle AL. Effect of a crown ferrule on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with prefabricated posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;95:50–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nissan J, Barnea E, Bar-Hen D, Assif D. Effect of remaining coronal structure on the resistance to fracture of crowned endodontically treated maxillary first premolars. Quintessence Int. 2008;39:e183–e187187.Google Scholar
Tan PL, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Stanford CM, Tan SC, Johnson WT, Dawson D. In vitro fracture resistance of endodontically treated central incisors with varying ferrule heights and configurations. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;93:331–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Munck J, Vargas MA, Van Landuyt K, Hikta K, Lambrachts P, Van Meerbeek B. Bonding of auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater. 2004;20:963–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Asaf K, Chakmakchi M, Palaghias G, Karanika-Kouma A, Eliades G. Interfacial characteristics of adhesive luting resins and composites with dentine. Dent Mater. 2007;23:829–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fráter M, Forster A, Jantyik Á, Braunitzer G, Nagy K, Grandini S. In vitro fracture resistance of premolar teeth restored with fibre-reinforced composite posts using a single or a multi-post technique. Aust Endod J. 2017;43:16–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Hannig C, Westphal C, Becker K, Attin T. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94:342–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Bitter K, Meyer-Lueckel H, Fotiadis N, Blunck U, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM, Paris S. Influence of endodontic treatment, post insertion, and ceramic restoration on the fracture resistance of maxillary premolars. Int Endod J. 2010;43:469–77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Signore A, Benedicenti S, Kaitsas V, Barone M, Angiero F, Ravera G. Long-term survival of endodontically treated, maxillary anterior teeth restored with either tapered or parallel-sided glass-fiber posts and full-ceramic crown coverage. J Dent. 2009;37:115–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Milot P, Stein RS. Root fracture in endodontically treated teeth related to post selection and crown design. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;68:428–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santini MF, Wandscher V, Amaral M, Baldissara P, Valandro LF. Mechanical fatigue cycling on teeth restored with fiber posts: impact of coronal grooves and diameter of glass fiber post on fracture resistance. Minerva Stomatol. 2011;60:485–93.Google Scholar
Abouelleil H, Pradelle N, Villat C, Attik N, Colon P, Grosgogeat B. Comparison of mechanical properties of a new fiber reinforced composite and bulk filling composites. Restor Dent Endod. 2015;40:262–70.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
Al-Omiri MK, Mahmoud AA, Rayyan MR, Abu-Hammad O. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with post-retained restorations: an overview. J Endod. 2010;36:1439–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang CY, Kuo JS, Lin YS, Chang YH. Fracture resistance and failure modes of CEREC endo-crowns and conventional post and core-supported CEREC crowns. J Dent Sci. 2009;4:110–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nam SH, Chang HS, Min KS. Effect of the number of residual walls on fracture resistances, failure patterns, and photoelasticity of simulated premolars restored with or without fiber-reinforced composite posts. J Endod. 2010;36:297–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heydecke G, Butz F, Strub JR. Fracture strength and survival rate of endodontically treated maxillary incisors with approximal cavities after restoration with different post and core systems: an in-vitro study. J Dent. 2001;29:427–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchi GM, Mitsui FHO, Cavalcanti AN. Effect of remaining dentine structure and thermal-mechanical aging on the fracture resistance of bovine roots with different post and core systems. Int Endod J. 2008;41:969–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naumann M, Sterzenbach G, Pröschel P. Evaluation of load testing of postendodontic restorations in vitro: linear compressive loading, gradual cycling loading and chewing simulation. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biometer. 2005;74:829–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar