Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics

OPEN ACCESS

Author index

Page Path
HOME > Browse articles > Author index
Search
Alexandre Luiz Souto Borges 2 Articles
Effect of the restorative technique on load-bearing capacity, cusp deflection, and stress distribution of endodontically-treated premolars with MOD restoration
Daniel Maranha da Rocha, João Paulo Mendes Tribst, Pietro Ausiello, Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva, Milena Cerqueira da Rocha, Rebeca Di Nicoló, Alexandre Luiz Souto Borges
Restor Dent Endod 2019;44(3):e33.   Published online August 7, 2019
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2019.44.e33
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
Objectives

To evaluate the influence of the restorative technique on the mechanical response of endodontically-treated upper premolars with mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavity.

Materials and Methods

Forty-eight premolars received MOD preparation (4 groups, n = 12) with different restorative techniques: glass ionomer cement + composite resin (the GIC group), a metallic post + composite resin (the MP group), a fiberglass post + composite resin (the FGP group), or no endodontic treatment + restoration with composite resin (the CR group). Cusp strain and load-bearing capacity were evaluated. One-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test were used with α = 5%. Finite element analysis (FEA) was used to calculate displacement and tensile stress for the teeth and restorations.

Results

MP showed the highest cusp (p = 0.027) deflection (24.28 ± 5.09 µm/µm), followed by FGP (20.61 ± 5.05 µm/µm), CR (17.72 ± 6.32 µm/µm), and GIC (17.62 ± 7.00 µm/µm). For load-bearing, CR (38.89 ± 3.24 N) showed the highest, followed by GIC (37.51 ± 6.69 N), FGP (29.80 ± 10.03 N), and MP (18.41 ± 4.15 N) (p = 0.001) value. FEA showed similar behavior in the restorations in all groups, while MP showed the highest stress concentration in the tooth and post.

Conclusions

There is no mechanical advantage in using intraradicular posts for endodontically-treated premolars requiring MOD restoration. Filling the pulp chamber with GIC and restoring the tooth with only CR showed the most promising results for cusp deflection, failure load, and stress distribution.

  • 26 View
  • 1 Download
Close layer
Influence of thickness and incisal extension of indirect veneers on the biomechanical behavior of maxillary canine teeth
Victória Luswarghi Souza Costa, João Paulo Mendes Tribst, Eduardo Shigueyuki Uemura, Dayana Campanelli de Morais, Alexandre Luiz Souto Borges
Restor Dent Endod 2018;43(4):e48.   Published online November 12, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2018.43.e48
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
Objectives

To analyze the influence of thickness and incisal extension of indirect veneers on the stress and strain generated in maxillary canine teeth.

Materials and Methods

A 3-dimensional maxillary canine model was validated with an in vitro strain gauge and exported to computer-assisted engineering software. Materials were considered homogeneous, isotropic, and elastic. Each canine tooth was then subjected to a 0.3 and 0.8 mm reduction on the facial surface, in preparations with and without incisal covering, and restored with a lithium disilicate veneer. A 50 N load was applied at 45° to the long axis of the tooth, on the incisal third of the palatal surface of the crown.

Results

The results showed a mean of 218.16 µstrain of stress in the in vitro experiment, and 210.63 µstrain in finite element analysis (FEA). The stress concentration on prepared teeth was higher at the palatal root surface, with a mean value of 11.02 MPa and varying less than 3% between the preparation designs. The veneers concentrated higher stresses at the incisal third of the facial surface, with a mean of 3.88 MPa and a 40% increase in less-thick veneers. The incisal cover generated a new stress concentration area, with values over 48.18 MPa.

Conclusions

The mathematical model for a maxillary canine tooth was validated using FEA. The thickness (0.3 or 0.8 mm) and the incisal covering showed no difference for the tooth structure. However, the incisal covering was harmful for the veneer, of which the greatest thickness was beneficial.

  • 21 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics
Close layer
TOP