Porównanie odporności na złamanie zębów odbudowanych
endokoronami i wkładami koronowo-korzeniowymi
kompozytowymi wzmacnianymi włóknami szklanymi
– badanie in vitro

Dominika Konarska-Matysiak; Beata Dejak

doi:10.5604/.1185904

6/2015 vol. 65

PRACA ORYGINALNA

Porównanie odporności na złamanie zębów odbudowanych endokoronami i wkładami koronowo-korzeniowymi kompozytowymi wzmacnianymi włóknami szklanymi – badanie in vitro

Dominika Konarska-Matysiak ¹

Beata Dejak ¹

Więcej

Ukryj

Medical University of Łódź

Prosthodontics 2015;65(6):509-517

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5604/.1185904

Artykuł (PDF)

Referencje (36)

SŁOWA KLUCZOWE

wkłady standardowe kompozytowe wzmacniane włóknami szklanymi

endokorony

odporność na złamanie

odbudowa zębów po leczeniu endodontycznym

REFERENCJE (36)

Weine FS, Wax AH, Wencklus CS:Retrospective study of tapered, smooth postsystems in place for 10 years or more. JEndodont 1991; 17: 293-297

Google Scholar

Ferrari M, Vichi A, Fadda GM, CagidiacoMC, Tay FR, Breschi L, Polimenti A,Goracci C: A Randomized Controlled Trialof Endodontically Treated and RestoredPremolars. J Dent Res 2012; 91, 7: 72-78.

Google Scholar

Mangold JT, Kern M: Influence of glass-fiberposts on the fracture resistance and failurepattern of endodontically treated premolarswith varying substance loss: An in vitro study.J Prosthet Dent 2011; 105, 6: 387-393.

Google Scholar

Meyenberg K: The ideal restoration of endodonticallytreated teeth – structural and estheticconsiderations: a review of the literatureand clinical guidelines for the restorative clinician.Eur J Esthet Dent 2013; 8: 238-268.

Google Scholar

Naumann M: Kiedy wskazane są wkłady koronowo-korzeniowe– klasyfikacja i koncepcjaterapeutyczna. Quintessence Lek Stom2003; 6: 327-334.

Google Scholar

Kraus BS, Jordan RE, Abrams L: The dentition:its alignment and articulation, in: KrausBS. eds. Dental anatomy and occlusion. TheWilliams and Wilkins Company, Baltimore,1969, 223-244.

Google Scholar

Salameh Z, Sorrentino R, Ounsi HF, GoracciC, Tashkandi E, Tay FR, Ferrari M: Effect ofdifferent all-ceramic crown system on fractureresistance and failure pattern of endodonticallytreated maxillary premolars restoratedwith and without glass fiber posts. J Endod2007; 33, 7: 848-851.

Google Scholar

Mendoza DB, Eakle WS, Kahl EA, Ho R: Rootreinforcement with a resin-bonded preformedpost. J Prosthet Dent 1997; 78, 1: 10-14.

Google Scholar

Bitter K, Meyer-Lueckel H, Fotiadis N,Blunck U, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM, et al.:Influence of endodontic treatment, post incertion,and ceramic restoration on the fractureresistance of maxillary premolars. Int Endo J2010; 43: 469-477.

Google Scholar

10.

Forberger N, Gohring TN: Influence of typeof post and core on in vitro marginal continuity,fracture resistance, and fracture mode ofLithia disilicate-based all-ceramic crowns. JPosthet Dent 2008; 100: 264-273.

Google Scholar

11.

Fokkinga WA, Le Bell AM, Kreulen CM,Lassila LVJ, Vallittu PK, Creugers NHJ: Exvivo fracture resistance of direct resin compositecomplete crowns with and without postson maxillary premolars. Int Endod J 2005; 38:230-237.

Google Scholar

12.

Stricker EJ, Gohring TN: Influence of differentposts and cores on marginal adaptation,fracture resistance, and fracture mode of compositerein crowns on human mandibular premolas.An in vitro study. J Dent 2006; 34:326-335.

Google Scholar

13.

Dejak B: Porównanie wytrzymałości zę-bów odbudowanych za pomocą indywidualnychwkładów koronowo-korzeniowych metalowychi standardowych kompozytowychwzmacnianych włóknami szklanymi. ProtetStomatol 2010; LX, 2: 112-123.

Google Scholar

14.

Dietschi D, Duc O, Krejci I, Sadan A:Biomechanical considerations for the restorationof endodontically treated teetha;a systematic review of the literature. Part II(Evaluation of fatigue behaviour, interfaces,and In vivo studies). Quint Int 2008; 39: 117-129.

Google Scholar

15.

Krejci I, Duc O, Dietschi D, de Campos E:Marginal adaptation, retention and fractureresistance of adhesive composite restorationson devital teeth with and without posts. OperDent 2003; 28: 127-135.

Google Scholar

16.

Lin CL, Chang YH, Chang CY, Pai CA, HuangSF: Finite element and Weibull analyses to estimatefailure risks In the ceramic endocrownand clasical crown for endodontacally treatedmaxillary premolar. Eur J Oral Sci 2010; 118:87-93.

Google Scholar

17.

Morgano MS: Restoration ofpulpless teeth:Application of traditional principles in presentand future contexts. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75,4: 375-380.

Google Scholar

18.

Massa F, Dias C, Blos CE: Resistance to frac

Google Scholar

19.

Assif D, Gorfil C: Biomechanical considerationIn restoring endodontically treated teeth.J Prosthet Dent 1994; 71: 565-567.

Google Scholar

20.

Christensen GJ: Posts: necessary Or unnecessary?J Am Dent Assoc 1996; 127: 1522-1524.

Google Scholar

21.

Christensen GJ: When to use fillers, build--ups Or posts and cores. J Am Dent Assoc1996; 127: 1397-1398.

Google Scholar

22.

Stockton L, Lavelle CL, Suzuki M: Are postsmandatowy for the restoration of endodonticallytreated teeth? Endod Dent Traumatol1998; 14: 59-63.

Google Scholar

23.

Salvi GE, SiegristGuldener BE, Amstad T,Joss L, Lang NP: Clinical evoluation of Rootfielled teeth resored with Or without post--and-core systems In a specialist practice setting.Int Endod J 2007; 40: 209-215.

Google Scholar

24.

Gohring TN, Peters AO: Restoration of endodonticallytreatedbteethwithout posts. Am JDent 2003, 16: 313-318.

Google Scholar

25.

Al-Omiri MK, Mahmound AA, Rayyan MR:Fracture resistance for post-retained restorations:A overview. J Endod 2010; 36, 9: 1439-1449.

Google Scholar

26.

Śpikowska-Szostak J, Dąbrowa T: Nowoczesnesystemy prefabrykowanych wkładów koronowo-korzeniowychw praktyce stomatologicznej– przegląd piśmiennictwa. Dent MedProbl 2009; 46, 4: 494-500.

Google Scholar

27.

Pierrisnard L, Bohin F, Renault P, BarquinsM: Coronoradicular re construction of pulpless teeth: a mechanical study using finite elementanalysis. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88: 442-448

Google Scholar

28.

Sathorn C, Palamara JE, Palamara D, MesserHH: Resistance of root canal size and externalroot surface morphology on fracture susceptibilityand pat tern: a finie element analysis. JEndod 2005; 40: 288-292.

Google Scholar

29.

Santos AFV, Meira JBC, Tamaka CB: Canfiber posts increase root stresses and reducefracture? J Dent Res 2010; 89: 587–591.

Google Scholar

30.

Makade CS, Meshram GK, Warhadpande M,Patil PG: A comparative evaluation of fractureresistance of endodontically treated teethrestored with different post core systems - anin-vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont 2011; 3, 2:90-95.

Google Scholar

31.

Jung SH, Min KS, Chang HS, Park SD, KwonSN, Bae JM: Microleak-age and fracture patternsof teeth restored with different posts underdynamic loading. J Prosthet Dentist 2007;98: 270-276. 33 Maccari PC, Conceicao EN, Nunes MF:Fracture resistance of endodontically treatedteeth restored with three different prefabricatedcomposite endodontic post. Biomaterials.2002; 23: 2667-2682.

Google Scholar

32.

Maccari PC, Conceicao EN, Nunes MF:Fracture resistance of endodontically treatedteeth restored with three different prefabricatedcomposite endodontic post. Biomaterials.2002; 23: 2667-2682.

Google Scholar

33.

Hayashi M, Takahashi Y, Imazato S, EbisuS: Fracture resistance of pulpless teeth restoredwith post-cores and crowns. Dent Mater2006; 22: 477-485. 35 Chenug W: A review of the management ofendodontically treated teeth: Post, core andthe final restoration. J Am Dent Assoc 2005;136: 611-619.

Google Scholar

34.

Chenug W: A review of the management ofendodontically treated teeth: Post, core andthe final restoration. J Am Dent Assoc 2005;136: 611-619.

Google Scholar

35.

Tamse A, Fuss Z, Lusting J, Kaplavi J: Anevaluation of endodontically treated verticallyfractured teeth. J Endod 1999; 25: 506-508.

Google Scholar

36.

Vire DE: Failure of endodontically treatedteeth: classification and evaluation. J Endod1999, 17: 338-342

Google Scholar

Wyślij swój artykuł

Instrukcje dla autorów