Premium
Effect of anti‐rotation devices on biomechanical behaviour of teeth restored with cast post‐and‐cores
Author(s) -
Raposo L. H. A.,
Silva G. R.,
SantosFilho P. C. F.,
Soares P. V.,
Soares P. B. F.,
SimamotoJunior P. C.,
FernandesNeto A. J.,
Soares C. J.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
international endodontic journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.988
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1365-2591
pISSN - 0143-2885
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01739.x
Subject(s) - fracture (geology) , materials science , stereo microscope , universal testing machine , dentistry , orthodontics , buccal administration , tooth fracture , stress (linguistics) , incisor , rotation (mathematics) , composite material , mathematics , medicine , geometry , ultimate tensile strength , linguistics , philosophy
Raposo LHA, Silva GR, Santos‐Filho PCF, Soares PV, Soares PBF, Simamoto‐Junior PC, Fernandes‐Neto AJ, Soares CJ . Effect of anti‐rotation devices on biomechanical behaviour of teeth restored with cast post‐and‐cores. International Endodontic Journal . Abstract Aim To test the hypothesis that the presence of an anti‐rotation device (ARD) and its location can influence the biomechanical behaviour of root filled teeth restored with cast post‐and‐cores and metallic crowns. Methodology Fifth two bovine incisor roots were selected and divided into four groups ( n = 13): Nd‐ without ARD; Bd‐ buccal ARD; Ld‐ lingual ARD; BLd‐ buccal and lingual ARD. The specimens were restored with cast post‐and‐cores and metallic crowns. After a fatigue process (3 × 10 5 50 N), three strain gauges were attached on the buccal, lingual and proximal surfaces and the samples of each group ( n = 3) were submitted to a 0–100 N load. Fracture resistance was assessed in a mechanical testing machine ( n = 10). Strain values and fracture resistance data were analysed by one‐way anova and Tukey Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test (α = 0.05). The failure mode was then evaluated under an optical stereomicroscope. Bidimensional models of each group were generated for finite element analysis (FEA) and analysed using the von Mises criteria. Results No significant difference in fracture resistance values and fracture modes occurred between the four groups. The BLd group had higher stress concentrations in the buccal dentine and higher strain values on the proximal surfaces. Conclusions The anti‐rotation devices did not influence significantly the fracture resistance and fracture mode. However, the stress–strain values were increased when the anti‐rotation device was prepared on the buccal and lingual faces concomitantly.