Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 428
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 25  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 179-184

Reinforcing the cervical dentin with bonded materials to improve fracture resistance of endodontically treated roots

1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Maharashtra Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Latur, India
2 Departrment of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, DY Patil University School of Dentistry, Mumbai, India
3 Ace Dental Care and Epident Implant Centre, Khar West, Mumbai, India
4 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sharvaree Ratnakar Deshpande
Department of Conservative Dentistry, Maharashtra Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Dental College, Latur, Vishwanathpuram, Ambajogai Road, Latur - 413 512, Maharashtra
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_609_21

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Endodontic procedure leads to the loss of tooth structure resulting in fractures. Intraorifice barriers of bonded restorative materials placed in the cervical third of tooth may help in increasing fracture resistance. Materials and Methods: Human mandibular premolars (n = 75) underwent decoronation to adjust working length at 14 mm and prepared up to F3. They were obturated using gutta-percha and resin sealer AH-Plus and randomly divided into five groups (n = 15), Group 1: Control obturated with gutta-percha only. Groups 2, 3, 4, and 5 had placement of intraorifice barriers after the removal of 3 mm coronal gutta-percha such that Group 2: RMGI, Group 3: Self-adhering flowable composite, Group 4: Bulkfill Flowable Composite, and Group 5: mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA). Mounting of specimens was done in acrylic resin to expose coronal 3 mm and tested using the universal testing machine. Results: Group 1 (control) showed least fracture strength among all groups. Among those with intraorifice barriers, Group 2 Resin-modified glass ionomer cement showed maximum fracture resistance followed by Group 4 (Bulkfill composite) and Group 5 (self-adhering flowable composite) and least by Group 5 (MTA). Conclusion: The type of intraorifice barrier had a significant impact on root fracture resistance.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded18    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal