Intricate evaluation of fracture resistance in teeth restored with two commercially available composite resins: An in vitro study

Abstract

Background and Aim:Root canal therapy undoubtedly saves teeth but paradoxically weaken the hard tissues also.
Restorative materials which are used for crown buildup can easily fracture or detached due to weakened tooth
substructure. This clinical dilemma is very common in endodontically treated tooth restored with composite resins.
Therefore, authors conducted this study to evaluate fracture resistance in teeth restored with two commercially
available direct composite resins.
Materials & Methods: Total seventy five sample teeth (Mandibular first premolars) were selected byrandomized
sampling procedure All samples were preserved into 10% neutral buffered formalin for three days at room
temperature. Standard root canal procedure was completed in all teeth andcoronal portion of all samples were
prepared identically. 3MFiltek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative resin (group one) andTetric N-Ceram bulk Fill (group
two)were studied.Group three samples were not prepared and non-restored (control). The test samples were
positioned on the universal testing machine. The magnitude of the applied load was noted for each sample in
Newtons and entered in to table. Data thus obtained were subjected to statistical analysis wherein P value less than
0.05 was considered significant.
StatisticalAnalysis and Results: Statistical evaluation was attempted using statistical software Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences version 21.0.Mean fracture resistance for group one samples (3MFiltek Bulk Fill Posterior
Restorative) was 1.320 KN wherein p value was highly significant. Mean fracture resistance for group two samples
(Tetric N-Ceram bulk Fill) were 1.198 KN. Mean fracture resistance for group three samples (control) was 1.542
KN wherein p value was significant.Two sample t- test was conducted for comparison of variables between three
groupsand revealed highly significant p value.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, authors have drawn few very significant conclusions. In restoration
of posterior endodontically treated teeth, 3MFiltek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative resin showed superior fracture
resistance as compared to Tetric N-Ceram bulk Fill. Moreover, mean fracture resistance values for 3MFiltek Bulk
Fill Posterior Restorative resin was highly significant.