J Adv Prosthodont.  2017 Oct;9(5):328-334. 10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.328.

Effect of ferrule on the fracture resistance of mandibular premolars with prefabricated posts and cores

• Kim AR
• Lim HP
• Yang HS
• Park SW

• KMID: 2393217
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.328

Abstract

PURPOSE
This study evaluated fracture resistance with regard to ferrule lengths and post reinforcement on endodontically treated mandibular premolars incorporating a prefabricated post and resin core.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
One hundred extracted mandibular premolars were randomly divided into 5 groups (n=20): intact teeth (NR); endodontically treated teeth (ETT) without post (NP); ETT restored with a prefabricated post with ferrule lengths of either 0 mm (F0), 1 mm (F1), or 2 mm (F2). Prepared teeth were restored with metal crowns. A thermal cycling test was performed for 1,000 cycles. Loading was applied at an angle of 135 degrees to the axis of the tooth using a universal testing machine with a crosshead speed of 2.54 mm/min. Fracture loads were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD test using a statistical program (α=.05).
RESULTS
There were statistical differences in fracture loads among groups (P<.001). The fracture load of F2 (237.7 ± 83.4) was significantly higher than those of NP (155.6 ± 74.3 N), F0 (98.8 ± 43.3 N), and F1 (152.8 ± 78.5 N) (P=.011, P<.001, and P=.008, respectively).
CONCLUSION
Fracture resistance of ETT depends on the length of the ferrule, as shown by the significantly increased fracture resistance in the 2 mm ferrule group (F2) compared to the groups with shorter ferrule lengths (F0, F1) and without post (NP).

Keyword

Ferrule; Mandibular premolar; Fracture resistance; Post

MeSH Terms

Bicuspid*
Crowns
Tooth

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Schematic drawing of specimen restored with prefabricated post and core mounted in acrylic resin block.

• 

  Fig. 2 Different ferrule lengths; control group NR, NP, and experimental groups F0, F1, and F2 (left to right).

• 

  Fig. 3 Diagram of teeth with crown.

• 

  Fig. 4 Tukey HSD test with fracture load between groups (*P < .05, **P < .01, ***P < .001).

Reference

1. Tang W, Wu Y, Smales RJ. Identifying and reducing risks for potential fractures in endodontically treated teeth. J Endod. 2010; 36:609–617.

2. Al-Omiri MK, Mahmoud AA, Rayyan MR, Abu-Hammad O. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with post-retained restorations: an overview. J Endod. 2010; 36:1439–1449.

3. Fernandes AS, Dessai GS. Factors affecting the fracture resistance of post-core reconstructed teeth: a review. Int J Prosthodont. 2001; 14:355–363.

4. Schwartz RS, Robbins JW. Post placement and restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a literature review. J Endod. 2004; 30:289–301.

5. Mangold JT, Kern M. Influence of glass-fiber posts on the fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated premolars with varying substance loss: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2011; 105:387–393.

6. Stankiewicz NR, Wilson PR. The ferrule effect: a literature review. Int Endod J. 2002; 35:575–581.

7. Tamse A, Fuss Z, Lustig J, Kaplavi J. An evaluation of endodontically treated vertically fractured teeth. J Endod. 1999; 25:506–508.

8. McLaren JD, McLaren CI, Yaman P, Bin-Shuwaish MS, Dennison JD, McDonald NJ. The effect of post type and length on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2009; 101:174–182.

9. Hayashi M, Takahashi Y, Imazato S, Ebisu S. Fracture resistance of pulpless teeth restored with post-cores and crowns. Dent Mater. 2006; 22:477–485.

10. Büttel L, Krastl G, Lorch H, Naumann M, Zitzmann NU, Weiger R. Influence of post fit and post length on fracture resistance. Int Endod J. 2009; 42:47–53.

11. Pereira JR, Valle AL, Ghizoni JS, Só MV, Ramos MB, Lorenzoni FC. Evaluation of push-out bond strength of four luting agents and SEM observation of the dentine/fibreglass bond interface. Int Endod J. 2013; 46:982–992.

12. Ibrahim AM, Richards LC, Berekally TL. Effect of remaining tooth structure on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated maxillary premolars: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115:290–295.

13. Pereira JR, de Ornelas F, Conti PC, do Valle AL. Effect of a crown ferrule on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with prefabricated posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 95:50–54.

14. Samran A, El Bahra S, Kern M. The influence of substance loss and ferrule height on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars. An in vitro study. Dent Mater. 2013; 29:1280–1286.

15. Forberger N, Göhring TN. Influence of the type of post and core on in vitro marginal continuity, fracture resistance, and fracture mode of lithia disilicate-based all-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 100:264–273.

16. Gegauff AG. Effect of crown lengthening and ferrule placement on static load failure of cemented cast post-cores and crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 84:169–179.

17. Zhi-Yue L, Yu-Xing Z. Effects of post-core design and ferrule on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary central incisors. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 89:368–373.

18. Salameh Z, Ounsi HF, Aboushelib MN, Sadig W, Ferrari M. Fracture resistance and failure patterns of endodontically treated mandibular molars with and without glass fiber post in combination with a zirconia-ceramic crown. J Dent. 2008; 36:513–519.

19. Cagidiaco MC, García-Godoy F, Vichi A, Grandini S, Goracci C, Ferrari M. Placement of fiber prefabricated or custom made posts affects the 3-year survival of endodontically treated premolars. Am J Dent. 2008; 21:179–184.

20. Sorensen JA, Martinoff JT. Intracoronal reinforcement and coronal coverage: a study of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 1984; 51:780–784.

21. Sorensen JA, Engelman MJ. Ferrule design and fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 63:529–536.

22. Fokkinga WA, Le Bell AM, Kreulen CM, Lassila LV, Vallittu PK, Creugers NH. Ex vivo fracture resistance of direct resin composite complete crowns with and without posts on maxillary premolars. Int Endod J. 2005; 38:230–237.

23. Mohammadi N, Kahnamoii MA, Yeganeh PK, Navimipour EJ. Effect of fiber post and cusp coverage on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars directly restored with composite resin. J Endod. 2009; 35:1428–1432.

24. 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; 29:427–433.

25. Guzy GE, Nicholls JI. In vitro comparison of intact endodontically treated teeth with and without endo-post reinforcement. J Prosthet Dent. 1979; 42:39–44.

26. Hoag EP, Dwyer TG. A comparative evaluation of three post and core techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 1982; 47:177–181.

27. Trope M, Maltz DO, Tronstad L. Resistance to fracture of restored endodontically treated teeth. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1985; 1:108–111.

28. Stockton LW. Factors affecting retention of post systems: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 1999; 81:380–385.

29. Torbjörner A, Fransson B. A literature review on the prosthetic treatment of structurally compromised teeth. Int J Prosthodont. 2004; 17:369–376.

30. Standlee JP, Caputo AA, Hanson EC. Retention of endodontic dowels: effects of cement, dowel length, diameter, and design. J Prosthet Dent. 1978; 39:400–405.

31. Ruemping DR, Lund MR, Schnell RJ. Retention of dowels subjected to tensile and torsional forces. J Prosthet Dent. 1979; 41:159–162.

32. Sherfudhin H, Hobeich J, Carvalho CA, Aboushelib MN, Sadig W, Salameh Z. Effect of different ferrule designs on the fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated teeth restored with fiber posts and all-ceramic crowns. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011; 19:28–33.

33. Ng CC, Dumbrigue HB, Al-Bayat MI, Griggs JA, Wakefield CW. Influence of remaining coronal tooth structure location on the fracture resistance of restored endodontically treated anterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 95:290–296.

34. Aykent F, Kalkan M, Yucel MT, Ozyesil AG. Effect of dentin bonding and ferrule preparation on the fracture strength of crowned teeth restored with dowels and amalgam cores. J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 95:297–301.

35. Arunpraditkul S, Saengsanon S, Pakviwat W. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth: three walls versus four walls of remaining coronal tooth structure. J Prosthodont. 2009; 18:49–53.

36. Akkayan B. An in vitro study evaluating the effect of ferrule length on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with fiber-reinforced and zirconia dowel systems. J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 92:155–162.

37. Wagnild G, Mueller K. Pathways of the pulp. In : Cohen S, Burns R, editors. The restoration of the endodontically treated tooth. 8th ed. St. Louis: Mosby;2002. p. 765–794.

38. 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; 93:331–336.

39. Santos-Filho PC, Veríssimo C, Soares PV, Saltarelo RC, Soares CJ, Marcondes Martins LR. Influence of ferrule, post system, and length on biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated anterior teeth. J Endod. 2014; 40:119–123.

40. Torbjörner A, Karlsson S, Odman PA. Survival rate and failure characteristics for two post designs. J Prosthet Dent. 1995; 73:439–444.

41. Samran A, Al-Afandi M, Kadour JA, Kern M. Effect of ferrule location on the fracture resistance of crowned mandibular premolars: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114:86–91.

42. Lindemuth JS, Hagge MS, Broome JS. Effect of restoration size on fracture resistance of bonded amalgam restorations. Oper Dent. 2000; 25:177–181.

43. Görücü J, Ozgünaltay G. Fracture resistance of teeth with Class II bonded amalgam and new tooth-colored restorations. Oper Dent. 2003; 28:501–507.

44. Barcellos RR, Correia DP, Farina AP, Mesquita MF, Ferraz CC, Cecchin D. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with intra-radicular post: the effects of post system and dentine thickness. J Biomech. 2013; 46:2572–2577.

45. Wegner PK, Freitag S, Kern M. Survival rate of endodontically treated teeth with posts after prosthetic restoration. J Endod. 2006; 32:928–931.

46. Sorensen JA, Martinoff JT. Endodontically treated teeth as abutments. J Prosthet Dent. 1985; 53:631–636.

47. Reynolds JM. Abutment selection for fixed prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent. 1968; 19:483–488.