Influence of polymerisation method and type of fibre on fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth

Fracture Resistance of Fiber-Reinforced Composite Restorations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Composite resin is universally used for posterior teeth restorations. Fibers have been suggested for the mechanical improvement of the restorations. This study assessed the fracture resistance of class II fiber-reinforced composite restorations and compared it with the fracture resistance of three control groups: (1) healthy teeth, (2) non-fiber-reinforced restorations and (3) unrestored cavities. A search was performed using PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar from 15 May to 12 June 2023. Only in vitro studies from the last 10 years were included for this systematic analysis. This study was registered in the PROSPERO database, it followed PRISMA guidelines and the risk of bias was assessed using the QUIN tool. Fracture resistance median values, in Newtons (N), were calculated for the experimental and control groups (95% confidence interval). For pairwise comparison, nonparametric tests (p < 0.05) were applied. Twenty-four in vitro studies met the inclusion criteria. The fracture resistance of the experimental group was 976.0 N and differed (p < 0.05) from all controls. The experimental group showed lower values of fracture resistance than healthy teeth (1459.9 N; p = 0.048) but higher values than non-fiber-reinforced restorations (771.0 N; p = 0.008) and unrestored cavities (386.6 N; p < 0.001). In vitro systematic outcomes evidenced that glass and/or polyethylene fibers improved the fracture resistance of composite restorations.

Systematic review fracture resistance of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with fiber reinforced composites- a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Large cavity designs and access cavities impair endodontically treated tooth fracture resistance. As the tooth's strength is known to reduce significantly after the root canal treatment, occlusal loading as a result of functions such as chewing, biting and certain parafunctional tendencies makes the endodontically treated tooth vulnerable to fracture. Hence, after endodontic treatment, it is vital to give adequate and appropriate restorative material to avoid tooth fractures. Accordingly, the choice of such restorative material should be dictated by the property of fracture resistance.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to conduct a systematic review and critical analysis of available data from in vitro studies examining the fracture resistance of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with fiber-reinforced composites.

METHODOLOGY

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRIS-MA) Statement was used to guide the reporting of this systematic review A comprehensive literature search was performed using MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and LILACS. A manual search of the reference lists of the articles was also performed. The databases provided a total of 796 studies from the electronic systematic search. The databases provided a total of 796 studies from the electronic systematic search. Two reviewers scrutinized the papers for eligibility based on inclusion/exclusion criteria and extracted data. The studies were assessed for their potential risk of bias. Based on modified JBI & CRIS (checklist for reporting in vitro studies) guidelines, along with the methodology and treatment objective, we have formulated 13 parameters specifically to assess the risk of bias. A total of 18 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included for qualitative analysis. Considering the high heterogeneity of the studies included, a meta-analysis could not be performed.

RESULTS

The majority of the included studies had a moderate or high risk of bias. When compared to traditional hybrid composites, fiber-reinforced composites showed increased fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth in the majority of investigations. On the other hand, limited evidence was found for the bulk fill composites. Moreover, moderate evidence was found for the fracture resistance of inlays and fiber posts with fiber-reinforced composites for core build-up in endodontically treated teeth. No evidence could be found comparing the fracture resistance of endo crowns and fiber-reinforced composites in endodontically treated teeth.

CONCLUSION

According to the research, using fiber-reinforced composites instead of conventional hybrid composites improves the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. However, there was a high risk of bias in the research considered. No judgments could be reached about the superiority of one material over another based-on comparisons between other core restorations.

Effect of short fiber-reinforced composite combined with polyethylene fibers on fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Whether direct coronal restorations of endodontically treated teeth with short fiber-reinforced composite combined with polyethylene fibers provide adequate mechanical strength is unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the fracture strength of endodontically treated premolars with standardized mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) preparations restored with short fiber-reinforced composite (SFRC) combined with polyethylene Ribbond fibers (PRFs).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 40 premolars were selected and distributed into 4 groups (n=10) as follows: group restored with SFRC (EverX Posterior), group restored with PRF (Ribbond fibers), and group restored with the combination PRF+SFRC, all followed by a conventional composite resin (IPS Empress Direct). MOD preparations and endodontic treatments were prepared except in the control group (intact teeth). MOD preparations and endodontic treatments were prepared except in the control group (intact teeth). Specimens were loaded using a universal testing machine until fracture occurred at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min, and the failure type and fracture patterns was reported descriptively. The mean values of the groups were analyzed by using the Shapiro-Wilk test and 1-way ANOVA tests (α=.05).

RESULTS

Restoration with PRF+SFRC provided the highest mean ±standard deviation fracture resistance (288.2 ±73.5 N). Restoration with just PRF had the lowest values (192.4 ±25.4 N), which were statistically different from those of SFRC and PRF+SFRC (P<.05). The predominant mode of failure was mixed, and all fracture patterns were favorable.

CONCLUSIONS

Reinforcing endodontically treated premolars with MOD cavities with Ribbond fibers followed by a conventional composite resin enhanced fracture resistance and may be suitable for the direct coronal restoration of large posterior cavities in stress-bearing areas.

Comparison of fiber reinforcing methods of composite resin: A flexural strength and stereo microscopy study

This study aimed to compare the effect of fiber reinforcing methods on the flexural strength and failure modes of indirect composite resins. Based on the reinforcement methods, the bar specimens (3 × 3 × 25 mm) were divided into five groups (n = 20). Glass or polyethylene fibers were used for reinforcement of indirect composite resins. Fibers were either light polymerized and mixed with indirect composite resin or mixed with indirect composite resin after resin application and polymerized together. Indirect composite resin without fiber reinforcement was used as control. All five types of specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 24 h. Half of the specimens were additionally thermocycled. Then the specimens were tested in a three-point bending test. Failure types were examined and categorized by using stereo microscope. The data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD test. Flexural strength was found to be significantly higher for fiber-reinforced indirect resin composites than control. However, the fiber-reinforced groups did not present any significant difference. Analysis revealed aging does not affect the flexure strength of fiber reinforcement of indirect composite resin. The study concluded that the flexure strength of indirect composite resins was improved with fiber reinforcement. Different fiber reinforcement methods demonstrated similar effects on the flexure strength of indirect composite resin. Reinforcement with glass or polyethylene fibers presented the potential to improve the mechanical properties of indirect composite resins. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: Flexural strength of indirect composite resins are affected by the reinforcement of composites with glass or polyethylene fibers. Aging with thermocycling has no effect on the flexural strength of the indirect composite resins, however can cause catastrophic failures in material.

Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Fiber-Reinforced Composite Materials in Class 1 Post-Endodontic Restorations in Molars-A Randomized Clinical Study

This study aimed to evaluate and compare two different fiber-reinforced composite materials in class I post-endodontic restoration in molars. A total of 50 patients were randomly assigned into two groups (n = 25 for each group); group A: everX Posterior (packable composite) with a top layer of solareX (nano-hybrid composite) and group B: everX Flow (flowable composite) with a top layer of G-aenial universal injectable (flowable composite). Patients were evaluated immediately after the procedure (baseline), at 6 months, and at 1 year time intervals based on the modified USPHS criteria. The statistical analysis using a chi-square test showed no statistically significant difference in the clinical performance of group A and group B. Clinical performance of the combination of everX Flow with overlying G-aenial universal injectable composite proved to be comparable with everX Posterior with overlying solareX composite as post-endodontic restorations in class I lesions in permanent molars.

Effect of fibre-reinforced composite as a post-obturation restorative material on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review

Background

Fracture resistance of endodontically treated tooth is affected due to large cavity designs and access cavities and an appropriate material capable to resist fracture plays an important role. This review aims to evaluate the effect of fibre-reinforced composite (FRC) as a post-obturation material on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth.

Objectives

To systematically gather and evaluate the fracture resistance of fibre-reinforced composite as a post-obturation restorative material in endodontically treated teeth.

Data Sources

A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Ebsco Host, Scopus, Google Scholar, Hinari and manual search library resources from 1st Jan 2000 to 30th November 2019 to identify appropriate studies.

Result

A total of 157 articles were examined out of which 55 articles were selected after reading the title. After removing the duplicates, 27 articles were screened for abstract and 1 article was eliminated as it did not meet the eligibility criteria. A thorough reading of the full text of the remaining 26 selected articles was assessed for eligibility. Amongst these, 1 article was then excluded from the study as the full text was not accessible. Lastly, 25 articles were included in the study.

Conclusion

FRC as a core material increases fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth but they do not have the fracture resistance similar to the intact tooth. Both polyethylene and short fibre-reinforced composites showed greater fracture resistance when compared to glass FRC and restoration without reinforcement. Also, the fracture resistance increases if restored with FRC along with retention slots and are placed on the occlusal third surfaces of cavities. Also, favourable fractures were most commonly seen and it usually occurred at the level of enamel and dentin and adhesive fractures were seen.

Effect of Fiber Reinforcement Type on the Performance of Large Posterior Restorations: A Review of In Vitro Studies

To reinforce extensively prepared cavities, different types of fiber reinforcement are utilized. Polyethylene and glass fibers are the most commonly used fibers in that purpose; each type has its own advantages over the other type. Therefore, the aim of this study is to review the literature to evaluate and compare the influence of different fiber reinforcement types on the performance of posterior large composite restorations. Two independent authors performed a comprehensive literature search using MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, and a manual search for cross references until July 2021. Authors selected only studies that contain comparisons between glass (continuous or short) and polyethylene (woven) fiber-reinforced composites (FRCs) in posterior cavities of human teeth, and that report the effect of fiber inclusion on fracture resistance, microleakage, and marginal adaptation of restorations. A number of 2711 potentially relevant articles were obtained from the electronic search. After extensive assessment, 2696 articles were ineligible to be included in the review, and only 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. Four out of nine studies, which tested the fracture resistance of FRC restorations, revealed similar performance of the glass and polyethylene fibers. The rest of the studies (n = 5) revealed statistically significant differences between the two types of fiber reinforcement, with the majority showed superior reinforcement of glass fiber. Moreover, the reviewed studies revealed that, using fibers within the composite restorations would reduce the microleakage and improve the marginal adaptation of the restoration regardless of the fiber type. FRCs tend to strengthen the restorations of structurally compromised teeth and improve their performance compared to plain composite restorations.

Effect of different coronal restorations on the fracture resistance of teeth with simulated regenerative endodontic treatment: An in vitro study

This study investigated the effect of different coronal restorations on the fracture resistance (FR) of immature teeth with simulated regenerative endodontic treatment. A total of 120 lower premolars were divided into eight groups. Except for negative control, the root canals were instrumented with rotary files and Peeso reamers. Fifteen instrumented teeth were acted as positive control (unrestorated). In the remaining 90 teeth, regenerative endodontic treatment procedures were performed. Ninety teeth were randomly divided into 6 groups according to coronal restoration type; Filtek Z550, Filtek Bulk fill Restorative (FBR), SDR+Filtek Z550, EverX+Filtek Z550, Ribbond+FBR and Ribbond+SDR+Filtek Z550. After thermal ageing, the restorated teeth were subjected to vertical loading force. FR values was obtained as follows: Negative control > Ribbond+FBR = Ribbond+SDR+Filtek Z550 > Filtek Z550 = FBR =SDR+Filtek Z550 = EverX+Filtek Z550 > Positive control, (P < 0.05). The use of Ribbond in combination with composite resin enhanced the FR of teeth.

Direct bilayered biomimetic composite restoration: The effect of a cusp-supporting short fiber-reinforced base design on the chewing fracture resistance and failure mode of molars with or without endodontic treatment

The aim of this study was to assess the chewing fracture resistance of compromised molars restored with direct composite resin (CR) restorations, with and without a short-fiber reinforcing (short-FRC) base. Wide extension of MOD cavities with removed palatal cusps preparations were simulated on 48 extracted maxillary molars. Five groups (n = 12) were designed: 1. control (intact teeth), 2. non-endodontically treated and 3. endodontically treated teeth with direct CR restorations (GC-Posterior), and 4. non-endodontically treated and 5. endodontically treated teeth with direct biomimetic bilayered restorations. Groups 4 and 5 included an anatomically shaped short-FRC base (everX Posterior), covered with a 2 mm CR layer (GC-Posterior). Restorations were subjected to chewing in water (1.5 Hz), with load of 85 N. Specimens were loaded until fracture or to a maximum of 120 000 cycles. Restorations that survived the chewing cycle were submitted to static load test (post-chewing test). The data were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA (p = 0.05) and fracture types with the chi-square test (p = 0.05). Fractures were classified into reparable, possibly reparable or non-reparable. All specimens survived the chewing cycle. The chewing fracture resistance of the direct biomimetic restorations prepared on non-endodontically treated teeth (2889 N) was statistically significantly higher than the direct CR counterparts (1966 N) (p = 0.00015), which was not the case for the groups with endodontically treated teeth (p = 0.257). Inclusion of a short-FRC base also influenced the fracture type resulting in most reparable fractures (67-75% versus 25% for biomimetic and CR groups respectively) (p = 0.054). Anatomically shaped i.e. a cusp-supporting design made of short-FRC base (everX Posterior) improved the chewing fracture resistance and fracture manner of compromised molars regardless of whether they were endodontically treated or not.

Clinical performance and chemical-physical properties of bulk fill composites resin -a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of clinical and laboratory studies to compare the performance of bulk-fill and conventional composite resins in terms of polymerization shrinkage, polymerization stress, cusp deflection, marginal quality, degree of conversion, microhardness, flexural strength, fracture strength and clinical performance.

DATA

One hundred three articles were included in this study, and the Peto method was used to compare the bulk-fill and conventional composites using the RevMan software.

SOURCES

Searches were performed in the PubMed and Scopus databases.

STUDY SELECTION

Laboratory studies and randomized clinical trials comparing one of the previous detailed outcomes between bulk-fill and control composites were included.

CONCLUSIONS

The bulk-fill composite resins showed less shrinkage, polymerization stress, cusp deflection and microhardness than conventional composites, while both materials presented a similar marginal quality, flexural strength and fracture strength. Also, bulk-fill materials with regular viscosity showed similar shrinkage. The conversion of bulk-fill materials with flowable consistency were similar to conventional composite resins with a thickness of up to 2mm and greater than conventional composites with a thickness greater than 2mm. Despite these in vitro differences, the clinical performance of bulk-fill and conventional composite resins was similar in randomized clinical trials, with one to ten years of follow up. In conclusion, the bulk-fill materials show better or similar performance to the conventional materials in clinical trials and laboratory studies in terms of volumetric shrinkage, polymerization stress, cusps deflection and marginal quality, with the only exception being the lower level of microhardness observed for bulk-fill composites with thickness up to 2mm.