Influence of conservative endodontic access and the osteoporotic bone on the restoration material adhesive behavior through finite element analysis
Source abstract
Abstract
Assess, using finite element analysis, the adhesive behavior of Class I restorations under physiological occlusal loads on an endodontically treated first upper premolar with conventional and conservative crown opening surrounded by alveolar bone in normal and osteoporotic conditions. For this, four virtual models were used: M1-conservative access/normal bone; M2-conventional access/normal bone; M3-conservative access/osteoporotic bone; M4-conventional access/osteoporotic bone. On enamel, under axial load, the highest peaks occurred on conventional models and, under oblique load, the highest peaks occurred on conservative opening models. The bone condition showed no influence on the adhesive behavior. On dentin, under axial load, the models showed similar behaviors, regardless of the bone condition; under oblique load, the highest incidence of forces occurred on the distal region of the palatal root canal entrance and the highest peak was observed in the conventional opening model with normal bone. Also, under oblique load, conventional opening models showed larger values on dentin for the normal bone and similar for the osteoporotic. The conclusions shows higher displacement tensile strength peaks were observed in the conventional models, which can lead to a greater risk of adhesive failure on class I restorations with this opening. Therefore, a conservative opening would be recommended to avoid opening clinical complications. The bone condition showed no significant influence on adhesive behavior, except for dentin under oblique load, where conventional models showed larger values relative to normal bone and similar to the osteoporotic bone.
Source: europepmc · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Endodontics and Root Canal Treatments · Dental materials and restorations · Dental Radiography and Imaging
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. Zelic K, Vukicevic A, Jovicic G, Aleksandrovic S, Filipovic N, Djuric M. Mechanical weakening of devitalized teeth: three‐dimensional Finite Element Analysis and prediction of tooth fracture. I Int Endod J. 2015;48(9):850–63.10.1111/iej.12381 ↗
2. Chalissery VP, Marwah N, Almuhaiza M, AlZailai AM, Chalisserry EP, Bhandi SH, et al. Study of the mechanical properties of the novel zirconia-reinforced glass ionomer cement. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016;17(5):394–8.10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1861 ↗
3. Bicalho AA, De Souza SJB, De Rosatto CMP, Tantbirojn D, Versluis A, Soares CJ. Effect of temperature and humidity on post-gel shrinkage, cusp deformation, bond strength and shrinkage stress–construction of a chamber to simulate the oral environment. Dent Mater. 2015;31(12):1523–32.10.1016/j.dental.2015.09.023 ↗
4. Soares CJ, Bicalho AA, Tantbirojn D, Versluis A. Polymerization shrinkage stresses in a premolar restored with different composite resins and different incremental techniques. J Adhes Dent. 2013;15(4):341–50.
5. Soares CJ, Rodrigues MDP, Vilela ABF, Pfeifer CS, Tantbirojn D, Versluis A. Polymerization shrinkage stress of composite resins and resin cements–what do we need to know? Braz Oral Res. 2017;31(1):47–63.
6. Mezzomo LA, Corso L, Marczak RJ, Rivaldo EG. Three‐dimensional FEA of effects of two dowel‐and‐core approaches and effects of canal flaring on stress distribution in endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthodontics. 2011;20(2):120–9.10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00669.x ↗
7. Sorrentino R, Aversa R, Ferro V, Auriemma T, Zarone F, Ferrari M, Apicella A. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strain and stress distributions in endodontically treated maxillary central incisors restored with different post, core and crown materials. Dent Mater. 2007;23:983–93.10.1016/j.dental.2006.08.006 ↗
8. Clark D, Khademi J. Modern molar endodontic access and directed dentin conservation. Dent Clin North Am. 2010;54:249–73.10.1016/j.cden.2010.01.001 ↗
9. Clark D, Khademi J, Herbranson E. Fracture resistant endodontic and restorative preparations. Dent Today. 2013;32(2):118–20.
10. Gluskin AH, Peters CI, Peters OA. Minimally invasive endodontics: challenging prevailing paradigms. British Dent J. 2014;216(6):347–53.10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.201 ↗
11. Krishan R, Paqué F, Ossareh A, Krishen A, Dao T, Friedman S. Impacts of conservative endodontic cavity on root canal instrumentation efficacy and resistance to fracture assessed in incisors, premolars, and molars. J Endod. 2014;40:1160–6.10.1016/j.joen.2013.12.012 ↗
12. Brennan-Calanan RM, Genco RJ, Wilding GE, Hovey KM, Trevisan M, Wactawski-Wende J. Osteoporosis and oral infection: independent risk factors for oral bone loss. J Dent Res. 2008;87(4):323–7.10.1177/154405910808700403 ↗
13. Heaney RP. Pathophysiology of osteoporosis. Endocrinol Metab Clin. 1998;27(2):255–65.10.1016/S0889-8529(05)70004-9 ↗
14. Jeffcoat MK. Osteoporosis: a possible modifying factor in oral bone loss. Ann Periodontol. 1998;3(1):312–21.10.1902/annals.1998.3.1.312 ↗
15. Imai K. Analysis of vertebral bone strength, fracture pattern, and fracture location: a validation study using a computed tomography-based nonlinear finite element analysis. Aging Dis. 2015;6(3):180–7.10.14336/AD.2014.0621 ↗
16. Kribbs PJ. Comparison of mandibular bone in normal and osteoporotic women. JPD. 1990;63(2):218–22.
17. Devlin H, Horner K. Diagnosis of osteoporosis in oral health care. J Oral Rehabil. 2008;35(2):152–7.10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01791.x ↗
18. Helgason B, Perilli E, Schileo E, Taddei F, Brynjólfsson S, e Viceconti M. Mathematical relationships between bone density and mechanical properties: a literature review. Clin Biomech. 2008;23(2):135–46.10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.08.024 ↗
19. Mahmoudi M, Saidi A, Nassab SAG, Hashemipour MA. A three-dimensional finite element analysis of the effects of restorative materials and post geometry on stress distribution in mandibular molar tooth restored with post-core crown. Dent Mater J. 2012;31(2):171–9.10.4012/dmj.2011-138 ↗
20. Vasco MAA, Souza JTAD, Las Casas EBD, de Castro e Silva ALR, Hecke M. A method for constructing teeth and maxillary bone parametric model from clinical CT scans. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng Imaging Vis. 2015;3(3):117–22.10.1080/21681163.2014.889579 ↗
21. Walshaw PR, Tam LE, Mccomb D. Bond failure at dentin-composite interfaces with ‘single-bottle’ adhesives. J Dent. 2003;31(2):117–25.10.1016/S0300-5712(03)00007-1 ↗
22. Craig RG, Restorative dental materials. 7th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1986.
23. Wu Y, Cathro P, Marino V. Fracture resistance and pattern of the upper premolars with obturated canals and restored endodontic occlusal access cavities. J Biomed Res. 2010;24:474–8.10.1016/S1674-8301(10)60063-2 ↗
24. Fennis WMM, Kuijs RH, Barink M, Kreulen CM, Verdonschot N, Creugers NHJ. Can internal stresses explain the fracture resistance of cusp-replacing composite restorations? Eur J Oral Sci. 2005;113:443–8.10.1111/j.1600-0722.2005.00233.x ↗
25. Palamara D, Palamara JEA, Tyas MJ, Messer HH. Strain patterns in cervical enamel of teeth subjected to occlusal loading. Dent Mater. 2000;16(6):412–9.10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00036-1 ↗
26. Frankenberger R, Tay FR. Self-etch vs etch-and-rinse adhesives: effect of thermo-mechanical fatigue loading on marginal quality of bonded resin composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2005;21(5):397–412.10.1016/j.dental.2004.07.005 ↗
27. Mattos CMA, Las Casas EB, Dutra IGR, Sousa HA, Guerra SMG. Numerical analysis of the biomechanical behaviour of a weakened root after adhesive reconstruction and post-core rehabilitation. J Dent. 2012;40(5):423–32.10.1016/j.jdent.2012.02.004 ↗
28. Williams C, Loushine RJ, Weller RN, Pashley DH, Tay FR. A comparison of cohesive strength and stiffness of Resilon and gutta-percha. J Endod. 2006;32(6):553–5.10.1016/j.joen.2005.08.002 ↗
29. Pane ES, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Critical evaluation of the push-out test for root canal filling materials. J Endod. 2013;39(5):669–73.10.1016/j.joen.2012.12.032 ↗
30. Franco ABG, Carvalho GAP, Dias SC, Kreve S, De Martin AS. Osteoporosis and endodontic access: analysis of fracture using finite element method. IJODM. 2017;16(5):1–5.