Evaluation of two post core systems using two different methods (fracture strength test and a finite elemental stress analysis)

Journal of Endodontics

Volumn 28, Issue 9, 2002, Pages 629-633

  Eskitaşcioǧlu, Gürcan ^a   Belli, Sema ^b   Kalkan, Mustafa ^b  

^a Department of Prosthodontics ^*  (Turkey)

^b SELCUK UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS; CLEARFIL LINER BOND 2; DENTAL ALLOY; DENTIN BONDING AGENT; METHACRYLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; POLYETHYLENE DERIVATIVE; RESIN CEMENT; RIBBOND; VARIOLINK; ZINC PHOSPHATE;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CHEMICAL MODEL; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DENTAL CARE; ELASTICITY; ENDODONTICS; EVALUATION; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; INCISOR; INSTRUMENTATION; MECHANICAL STRESS; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PHYSIOLOGY; TOOTH CROWN; TOOTH ROOT; WEIGHT BEARING;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; DENTAL ALLOYS; DENTAL MATERIALS; DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; DENTIN-BONDING AGENTS; ELASTICITY; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; INCISOR; METHACRYLATES; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, CHEMICAL; POLYETHYLENES; POST AND CORE TECHNIQUE; RESIN CEMENTS; ROOT CANAL OBTURATION; ROOT CANAL PREPARATION; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; STRESS, MECHANICAL; TOOTH ROOT; WEIGHT-BEARING; ZINC PHOSPHATE CEMENT;

EID: 0036728222     PISSN: 00992399     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200209000-00001     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Sedgley CM, Messer HH. Are endodontically treated teeth more brittle? J Endodon 1992;18:332-5.
2. Cohen S, Burns CB. Pathways of the pulp. 7th ed. St. Louis: CV Mosby, 1998:691-717.
3. DeSort KD. The prosthodontic use of endodontically treated teeth: theory and biomechanics of post preparation. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49:203-6.
4. Kern SB, Von Fraunhofer JA, Mueninghoff LA. An in vitro comparison of two dowel and core techniques for endodontically treated molars. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51:509-14.
5. Chan FW, Harcourt JK, Brockhurst PJ. The effect of post adaptation in the root canal on retention of posts cemented with various cements. Aust Dent J 1993;38:39-45.
6. Sidoli GE, King PA, Setchell DJ. An in vitro evaluation of carbon fiberbased post and core system. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:5-9.
7. Asmussen E, Peutzfeld A, Heitmann T. Stiffness, elastic limit, and strength of newer types of endodontic posts. J Dent 1999;27:275-8.
8. Beer F, Johnston R. Mechanics of materials. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.
9. Wheeler RC. Dental anatomy physiology and occlusion. London: WB Saunders, 1984.
10. Reinhardt RA, Krejci RF, Pao YC, Stannard JG. Dentin stresses in post-reconstructed teeth with diminishing bone support. J Dent Res 1983; 62:1002-8.
11. Weinstein AM, Klawitter JJ, Cook SD. Implant-bone interface characteristic of bioglass dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res 1980;14:23-9.
12. Williams KR, Edmundson JT, Rees JS. Finite element analysis of restored teeth. Dent Mater 1987;3:200-6.
13. Yaman SD, Alaçam T, Yaman Y. Analysis of stress distribution in a maxillary central incisor subjected to various post and core applications. J Endodon 24:107-11.
14. Caputo AA, Standlee JP. Biomechanics in clinical dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co., 1987.
15. Ko CC, Chu CS, Chung KH, Lee MC. Effects of posts on dentin stress distribution in pulpless teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:421-7.
16. Assif D, Bitenski A, Pilo R, Oren E. Effect of post design on resistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth with complete crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1993;69:36-40.
17. Gordon JE. The new science of strong materials, or why you don't fall through the floor. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.
18. Sorensen JA, Engleman MJ. Effect of post adaptation on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:529-36.
19. Strassler HE, White M. An adhesive-aesthetic post and core technique. Est Dent Update 1995;6:34-40.