Optimal post height and diameter in preformed zirconia crown restoration on 3D-printed primary incisors

In this in vitro study, fracture resistance was evaluated according to the post-diameter and -length in zirconia crown restorations on three-dimensional printed primary incisors undergone pulpectomy. One hundred-and-sixty primary incisor abutments were used which were artificially fabricated through 3D-printing. Each group was divided into two subgroups based on the zirconia post-diameter (1.5 mm and 2.0 mm) employed for post setting after pulpectomy. Furthermore, each group was divided into four subgroups based on the zirconia post-height (3.0, 4.0, 5.0 and 6.0 mm). Zirconia post setting was made by applying flowable resin after filling the pulp cavity with calcium hydroxide up to 3.0 mm below cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). Finally, a preformed zirconia crown of size #1 was cemented to the abutment through resin cement. A compressive load was applied to the middle palatal surface of incisors restored with zirconia crowns by using a universal testing machine at 145◦ angle which is the normal interincisal angle of children. The root fracture specimens were excluded and the samples fractured within crown and core parts were included in the final fracture resistance analysis. The group with 1.5-mm post-diameter and 5.0-mm post-height had the highest fracture resistance strength (130.63 ± 55.75 N) under masticatory pressure condition. Fracture resistance was statistically greater in 5.0-mm than in 4.0-mm and 3.0-mm post-height groups for 1.5-mm post-diameter subgroup. Moreover, 5.0-mm post-height subgroup had a statistically greater fracture resistance than that of 3.0-mm post-height subgroup for 2.0-mm post-diameter group. The 2.0-mm post-diameter subgroup had a statistically greater fracture resistance than that of 1.5-mm post-diameter subgroup for 3.0-mm and 4.0-mm post-heights. If zirconia post incorporation is required for deciduous incisor restoration, a post-length equal to facial CEJ level is recommended for gaining additional retention against masticatory pressure.

3D-printing; Fracture resistance; Zirconia crown; Zirconia post-setting

[1] Ferreira MC, Kummer TR, Vieira RS, Calvo MC. Short resin-posts bonding to primary dentin. Microleakage and micro-morphological in vitro study. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2007; 31: 202–206.

[2] Rajesh R, Baroudi K, Reddy KB, Praveen BH, Kumar VS, Amit S. Modified anchor shaped post core design for primary anterior teeth. Case Reports in Dentistry, 2014; 2014: 306910.

[3] Lee JK. Restoration of primary anterior teeth: review of the literature. Pediatric Dentistry. 2002; 24: 506–510.

[4] Mendes FM, De Benedetto MS, del Conte Zardetto CG, Wanderley MT, Correa MS. Resin composite restoration in primary anterior teeth using short-post technique and strip crowns: a case report. Quintessence International. 2004; 35: 689–692.

[5] Usha M, Deepak V, Venkat S, Gargi M. Treatment of severely mutilated incisors: a challenge to the pedodontist. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2007; 25: S34–S36.

[6] Walia T, Salami AA, Bashiri R, Hamoodi OM, Rashid F. A randomised controlled trial of three aesthetic full-coronal restorations in primary maxillary teeth. European Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. 2014; 15: 113–118.

[7] Ashima G, Sarabjot KB, Gauba K, Mittal HC. Zirconia crowns for rehabilitation of decayed primary incisors: an esthetic alternative. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2014; 39: 18–22.

[8] Planells del Pozo P, Fuks A. Zirconia crowns—an esthetic and resistant restorative alternative for ECC affected primary teeth. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2014; 38: 193–195.

[9] Aboushelib MN, Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Microtensile bond strength of different components of core veneered all-ceramic restorations. Part II: zirconia veneering ceramics. Dental Materials. 2006; 22: 857–863.

[10] Taran PK, Kaya MS. A comparison of periodontal health in primary molars restored with prefabricated stainless steel and zirconia crowns. Pediatric Dentistry. 2018; 40: 334–339.

[11] Abdulhadi B, Abdullah M, Alaki S, Alamoudi N, Attar M. Clinical evaluation between zirconia crowns and stainless steel crowns in primary molars teeth. Journal of Pediatric Dentistry. 2017; 5: 21.

[12] D’Addazio G, Santilli M, Rollo ML, Cardelli P, Rexhepi I, Murmura G, et al. Fracture resistance of zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic crowns cemented with conventional or adhesive systems: an in vitro study. Materials. 2020; 13: 2012.

[13] Pjetursson BE, Sailer I, Zwahlen M, Hämmerle CHF. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of all-ceramic and metal-ceramic reconstructions after an observation period of at least 3 years. Part I: single crowns. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2007; 18: 73–85.

[14] El-Shaabany MH, Mahfouz Omer SM, El-Baz GAE. Efficacy of different dentin posts for the treatment of primary anterior teeth (an in vitro study). Dental Science Updates. 2021; 2: 155–163.

[15] Mittal N, Bhatia HP, Haider K. Methods of intracanal reinforcement in primary anterior teeth—assessing the outcomes through a systematic literature review. International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2015; 8: 48–54.

[16] Meyenberg KH, Lüthy H, Schärer P. Zirconia posts: a new all-ceramic concept for nonvital abutment teeth. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 1995; 7: 73–80.

[17] Awad MA, Marghalani TY. Fabrication of a custom-made ceramic post and core using CAD-CAM technology. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2007; 98: 161–162.

[18] Streacker AB, Geissberger M. The milled ceramic post and core: a functional and esthetic alternative. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2007; 98: 486–487.

[19] Bittner N, Hill T, Randi A. Evaluation of a one-piece milled zirconia post and core with different post-and-core systems: an in vitro study. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2010; 103: 369–379.

[20] Nandini VV, Venkatesh VK, Kandaswamy D. Zirconia post-pressed ceramic core-supported all-ceramic crown: case reports and 4-year follow-up. The Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society. 2007; 7: 199–202.

[21] Choi H, Kim J, Yoo SE, Kwon J, Park K. Cephalometric characteristics of Korean children with class III malocclusion in the deciduous dentition. The Angle Orthodontist. 2010; 80: 86–90.

[22] Fernandes AS, Dessai GS. Factors affecting the fracture resistance of post-core reconstructed teeth: a review. The International Journal of Prosthodontics. 2001; 14: 355–363.

[23] Mamoun JS. On the ferrule effect and the biomechanical stability of teeth restored with cores, posts, and crowns. European Journal of Dentistry. 2014; 8: 281–286.

[24] Juloski J, Radovic I, Goracci C, Vulicevic ZR, Ferrari M. Ferrule effect: a literature review. Journal of Endodontics. 2012; 38: 11–19.

[25] Sorensen JA, Engelman MJ. Ferrule design and fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1990; 63: 529–536.

[26] Stankiewicz N, Wilson P. The ferrule effect. Dental Update. 2008; 35: 222–228.

[27] Slutzky-Goldberg I, Slutzky H, Gorfil C, Smidt A. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth review and treatment recommendations. International Journal of Dentistry. 2009; 2009: 1–9.

[28] Khaled AL-Omiri M, Mahmoud AA, Rayyan MR, Abu-Hammad O. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with post-retained restorations: an overview. Journal of Endodontics. 2010; 36: 1439–1449.

[29] McLean A. Predictably restoring endodontically treated teeth. Journal—Canadian Dental Association. 1998, 64: 782–787.

[30] Morgano SM. Restoration of pulpless teeth: application of traditional principles in present and future contexts. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1996; 75: 375–380.

[31] Zhang YX, Zhang WH, Lu ZY, Wang KL. Fracture strength of custom-fabricated Celay all-ceramic post and core restored endodontically treated teeth. Chinese Medical Journal. 2006; 119: 1815–1820.

[32] Shah S, Bargale S, Anuradha KVR, Patel N. Posts in primary teeth-a sile for better smile. Journal of Advanced Medical and Dental Sciences Research. 2016; 4: 58–64.

[33] Adanir N, Belli S. Evaluation of different post lengths’ effect on fracture resistance of a glass fiber post system. European Journal of Dentistry. 2008; 2: 23–28.

[34] Oblak C, Jevnikar P, Kosmac T, Funduk N, Marion L. Fracture resistance and reliability of new zirconia posts. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2004; 91: 342–348.

[35] Kurtz JS, Perdigão J, Geraldeli S, Hodges JS, Bowles WR. Bond strengths of tooth-colored posts, effect of sealer, dentin adhesive, and root region. American Journal of Dentistry. 2003; 16: 31A–36A.

[36] ÖZKURT Z, ISERI U, KAZAZOGLU E. Zirconia ceramic post systems: a literature review and a case report. Dental Materials Journal. 2010; 29: 233–245.

[37] Mountain G, Wood D, Toumba J. Bite force measurement in children with primary dentition. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. 2011; 21: 112–118.

[38] Vukicevic M, Mosadegh B, Min JK, Little SH. Cardiac 3D printing and its future directions. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. 2017; 10: 171–184.

[39] Lin L, Fang Y, Liao Y, Chen G, Gao C, Zhu P. 3D printing and digital processing techniques in dentistry: a review of literature. Advanced Engineering Materials. 2019; 21: 1801013.

[40] Alharbi N, Alharbi S, Cuijpers VMJI, Osman RB, Wismeijer D. Three-dimensional evaluation of marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed interim restorations fabricated on different finish line designs. Journal of Prosthodontic Research. 2018; 62: 218–226.

[41] Tian Y, Chen C, Xu X, Wang J, Hou X, Li K, et al. A review of 3D printing in dentistry: technologies, affecting factors, and applications. Scanning. 2021; 2021: 1–19.