Assessment of a conservative approach for restoration of extensively destroyed posterior teeth

Authors

  • José Mondelli Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Dentística, Endodontia e Materiais Odontológicos, Bauru, São Paulo http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9622-2799
  • Fabio Antonio Piola Rizzante Case Western Reserve University, School of Dental Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4123-5637
  • Fabiano Bassalobre Valera Private practice, Marília, São Paulo
  • Renato Roperto Case Western Reserve University, School of Dental Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio
  • Rafael Francisco Lia Mondelli Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Dentística, Endodontia e Materiais Odontológicos, Bauru, São Paulo http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5334-6836
  • Adilson Yoshio Furuse Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Departamento de Dentística, Endodontia e Materiais Odontológicos, Bauru, São Paul http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4705-6354

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0631%20

Keywords:

Composite resins, Dental cavity preparation, Endodontically treated teeth, Permanent dental restorations

Abstract

Extensive restorations in posterior teeth always bring doubts to the clinicians regarding the best protocol, mainly when structures of reinforcement were lost. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of beveling on the fracture resistance and pattern of class II (MOD) restored teeth. Methodology: Ninety human premolars were randomly assigned into 9 groups: CTR (control/sound); NC (cavity preparation, non-restored); RU (restored, unbeveled); RTB (restored, entire angle beveling); RPB (restored, partial/occlusal beveling); EC (endodontic access/EA, non-restored); EU (EA, unbeveled); ETB (EA, entire angle beveling); EPB (EA, partial/occlusal beveling). Teeth were restored with Esthet X resin composite and stored in distilled water for 24 h before the inclusion in PVC cylinders. The axial loading tests were performed with 500 kgF at 0.5 mm/min crosshead speed until fracture of the specimens. Fracture resistance and pattern were accessed and data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s HSD test (α=0.05). Results: Mean (±SD) failure loads ranged from 136.56 (11.62) to 174.04 (43.5) kgF in the groups tested without endodontic access. For endodontically accessed teeth, fracture resistance ranged from 95.54 (13.05) to 126.51 (19.88) kgF. Beveling of the cavosurface angle promoted the highest fracture resistance values (p<0.05) and prevented catastrophic fractures. Conclusions: Cavosurface angle beveling is capable of improving fracture resistance and pattern for both endodonticaly accessed and non-accessed teeth.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2022-07-08

Issue

Section

Original Articles

How to Cite

Assessment of a conservative approach for restoration of extensively destroyed posterior teeth. (2022). Journal of Applied Oral Science, 27, e20180631. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2018-0631