Short fiber reinforced composite on fracture strength of immature permanent anterior teeth with simulated regenerative endodontic procedures: an in vitro study
1Department of Pediatric Dentistry, University of Health Sciences, Hamidiye Faculty of Dental Medicine, 34668 Istanbul, Turkey
2Department of Endodontics, Istanbul Medeniyet University, 34956 Istanbul, Turkey
DOI: 10.22514/jocpd.2023.074 Vol.47,Issue 6,November 2023 pp.171-177
Submitted: 15 April 2023 Accepted: 20 June 2023
Published: 03 November 2023
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of short fiber reinforced composite on the fracture strength of anterior immature teeth treated with regenerative endodontic procedures. A total of 120 permanent maxillary central incisors were selected, and root lengths were standardized. Except for the positive control group (n = 20), the root canals were instrumented to simulate immature teeth with incomplete root development, and the regenerative endodontic procedure was performed. Twenty instrumented teeth acted as negative controls (n = 20), and the remaining 80 teeth were randomly divided into 4 groups according to the chosen coronal restoration material: bulk fill, short fiber reinforced composite (SFRC), polyethylene fiber (Ribbond Ultra), and flowable composite resin. Each specimen was then subjected to fracture testing using a universal testing machine (AGS-X, Shimadzu, Japan). The load to fracture was recorded. Data were subjected to statistical analysis using analysis of variance and the Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test. A significant difference was detected between the groups (p < 0.05), with the positive control group showing the highest mean fracture strength. The SFRC group had significantly higher values than the bulk fill, polyethylene fiber, flowable composite resin and negative control groups. In conclusion, SFRC has a relatively high fracture strength compared to other materials used in regenerative endodontic procedures. The use of SFRC enhanced the fracture strength of immature permanent teeth.
Fracture strength; Permanent; Regenerative endodontics
İpek Kınıkoğlu,Şükriye Türkoğlu Kayacı,Hakan Arslan. Short fiber reinforced composite on fracture strength of immature permanent anterior teeth with simulated regenerative endodontic procedures: an in vitro study. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2023. 47(6);171-177.
 Almutairi W, Yassen GH, Aminoshariae A, Williams KA, Mickel A. Regenerative endodontics: a systematic analysis of the failed cases. Journal of Endodontics. 2019; 45: 567–577.
 Santos JM, Diogo P, Dias S, Marques JA, Palma PJ, Ramos JC. Long-term outcome of nonvital immature permanent teeth treated with apexification and corono-radicular adhesive restoration: a case series. Journal of Endodontics. 2022; 48: 1191–1199.
 Hameed M, Gul M, Ghafoor R, Badar S. Management of immature necrotic permanent teeth with regenerative endodontic procedures—a review of literature. Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association. 2019; 69: 1514–1520.
 Porciuncula de Almeida M, Angelo da Cunha Neto M, Paula Pinto K, Rivera Fidel S, João Nogueira Leal Silva E, Moura Sassone L. Antibacterial efficacy and discolouration potential of antibiotic pastes with macrogol for regenerative endodontic therapy. Australian Endodontic Journal. 2021; 47: 157–162.
 Yan H, De Deus G, Kristoffersen IM, Wiig E, Reseland JE, Johnsen GF, et al. Regenerative endodontics by cell homing: a review of recent clinical trials. Journal of Endodontics. 2023; 49: 4–17.
 Divya D, Naik S, Raju O, Shivani B, Basappa N, Betur A. Conceptual combination of disinfection in regenerative endodontics: conventional versus laser-assisted disinfection. Journal of Conservative Dentistry. 2021; 24: 252.
 Ribeiro JS, Münchow EA, Ferreira Bordini EA, de Oliveira da Rosa WL, Bottino MC. Antimicrobial therapeutics in regenerative endodontics: a scoping review. Journal of Endodontics. 2020; 46: S115–S127.
 P. Panda, L. Mishra, S. Govind, S. Panda, B. Lapinska. Clinical outcome and comparison of regenerative and apexification intervention in young immature necrotic teeth—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022; 11: 3909.
 Lee C, Song M. Failure of regenerative endodontic procedures: case analysis and subsequent treatment options. Journal of Endodontics. 2022; 48: 1137–1145.
 Lin LM, Huang GT, Sigurdsson A, Kahler B. Clinical cell‐based versus cell‐free regenerative endodontics: clarification of concept and term. International Endodontic Journal. 2021; 54: 887–901.
 Arslan H, Şahin Y, Topçuoğlu HS, Gündoğdu B. Histologic evaluation of regenerated tissues in the pulp spaces of teeth with mature roots at the time of the regenerative endodontic procedures. Journal of Endodontics. 2019; 45: 1384–1389.
 Desai S, Chandler N. The restoration of permanent immature anterior teeth, root filled using MTA: a review. Journal of Dentistry. 2009; 37: 652–657.
 Ali MRW, Mustafa M, Bårdsen A, Bletsa A. Fracture resistance of simulated immature teeth treated with a regenerative endodontic protocol. Acta Biomaterialia Odontologica Scandinavica. 2019; 5: 30–37.
 Mello I, Michaud P, Butt Z. Fracture resistance of immature teeth submitted to different endodontic procedures and restorative protocols. Journal of Endodontics. 2020; 46: 1465–1469.
 Hiremath H, Misar P, Harinkhere C, Sonawane S, Sharma V, Rana K. Reinforcing an immature tooth model using three different restorative materials. Dental Research Journal. 2022; 19: 28.
 Lukarcanin J, Sadıkoğlu İS, Yaşa B, Türkün LŞ, Türkün M. Comparison of different restoration techniques for endodontically treated teeth. International Journal of Biomaterials. 2022; 2022: 6643825.
 Mergulhão V, de Mendonça L, de Albuquerque M, Braz R. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with different methods. Operative Dentistry. 2019; 44: E1–E11.
 Belli S, Erdemir A, Ozcopur M, Eskitascioglu G. The effect of fibre insertion on fracture resistance of root filled molar teeth with MOD preparations restored with composite. International Endodontic Journal. 2005; 38: 73–80.
 Soto-Cadena SL, Zavala-Alonso NV, Cerda-Cristerna BI, Ortiz-Magdaleno M. Effect of short fiber-reinforced composite combined with polyethylene fibers on fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2023; 129: 598.e1–598.e10.
 Gupta S, Gupta T, Mehra M, Grover R, Sadana G, Kaur B. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with different core build-up materials: an in vitro study. International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2021; 14: 51–58.
 H. Balkaya, H. S. Topçuoğlu, S. Demirbuga, Ö. Kafdağ, G. Topçuoğlu. Effect of different coronal restorations on the fracture resistance of teeth with simulated regenerative endodontic treatment: an in vitro study. Australian Endodontic Journal. 2022; 48: 331–337.
 A. Sogukpinar, V. Arikan. Comparative evaluation of four endodontic biomaterials and calcium hydroxide regarding their effect on fracture resistance of simulated immature teeth. European Journal of Paediatric Dentistry. 2020; 21: 23–28.
 J. Bijelic-Donova, T. Myyryläinen, V. Karsila, P. K. Vallittu, J. Tanner. Direct short-fiber reinforced composite resin restorations and glass-ceramic endocrowns in endodontically treated molars: a 4-year clinical study. European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry. 2022; 30: 284–295.
 Plotino G, Grande NM, Isufi A, Ioppolo P, Pedullà E, Bedini R, et al. Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth with different access cavity designs. Journal of Endodontics. 2017; 43: 995–1000.
 B. Bolhari, E. Mojazi Amiri, H. Kermanshah, S. Ghabraei, A. Jamei. Fracture resistance of simulated immature teeth obturated with gutta-percha or resilon and reinforced by composite or post. Journal of Dentistry. 2015; 12: 125–133.
 Divyasree V, Raghavendra Reddy J, Chandrasekhar V, Kasam S, Ramachandruni N, Penigalapati S, et al. Influence of access cavity design on the fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth restored using short fiber-reinforced composite and high strength posterior glass ionomer cement. Cureus. 2022; 14: e28135.
 Lassila L, Säilynoja E, Prinssi R, Vallittu PK, Garoushi S. Fracture behavior of Bi-structure fiber-reinforced composite restorations. Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. 2020; 101: 103444.
 A. Pantano, C. Militello, F. Bongiorno, B. Zuccarello. Analysis of the parameters affecting the stiffness of short sisal fiber biocomposites manufactured by compression-molding. Polymers. 2021; 14: 154.
 Belli S, Erdemir A, Yildirim C. Reinforcement effect of polyethylene fibre in root-filled teeth: comparison of two restoration techniques. International Endodontic Journal. 2006; 39: 136–142.
 N. H. M. Albar, W. F. Khayat. Evaluation of fracture strength of fiber-reinforced direct composite resin restorations: an in vitro study. Polymers. 2022; 14: 4339.
 de Sá MAB, Nunes E, Antunes ANDG, Brito Júnior M, Horta MCR, Amaral RR, et al. Push-out bond strength and marginal adaptation of apical plugs with bioactive endodontic cements in simulated immature teeth. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics. 2021; 46: e53.
 Seto B, Chung K, Johnson J, Paranjpe A. Fracture resistance of simulated immature maxillary anterior teeth restored with fiber posts and composite to varying depths. Dental Traumatology. 2013; 29: 394–398.
Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.
PubMed (MEDLINE) PubMed comprises more than 35 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.
Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.
Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.
JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.
Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.
BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.
Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.
Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.