Volume 10, Issue 3 (9-2025)
J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2025, 10(3): 184-191 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.IAU.DENTAL.REC.1401.022
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Abbaspour G, Barzegar Reyhani N, Safarzadeh Khosroshahi S, Jalalian S. Fracture Resistance of Unsupported Enamel Reinforced by Glass Fiber Ribbon. J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2025; 10 (3) :184-191
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-783-en.html
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-783-en.html
1- Dentist, Private Practice, Tehran, Iran.
2- Department of Restorative Dentistry, TeMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3- Department of Restorative Dentistry, Member of Dental Material Research Center, TeMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ,shahriar.jalalian@yahoo.com
2- Department of Restorative Dentistry, TeMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3- Department of Restorative Dentistry, Member of Dental Material Research Center, TeMS.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ,
Abstract: (301 Views)
Background and Aim: Fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) restoration is a relatively new method used to enhance the durability of composite restorations. This study measured the fracture resistance of unsupported enamel in composite restorations reinforced with fiber ribbon in comparison with conventional composite restorations.
Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 30 freshly extracted sound premolars were randomly divided into three groups (n=10): (I) control group: intact teeth, (II) mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) preparation followed by restoration with Filtek P60 composite, and (III) deep MOD preparation and cusp reduction, followed by reinforcement with Interlig fiber ribbon, and subsequent restoration and cusp coverage with Filtek P60 composite. The teeth were stored in saline for one week. Next, their fracture resistance was measured by a universal testing machine. The load at fracture was recorded in Newtons (N). One-way ANOVA followed by the Tamhane post-hoc test was used to compare the groups (alpha=0.05).
Results: Fracture resistance of enamel in both experimental groups was significantly reduced compared to intact teeth (P<0.05). Fracture resistance of enamel in FRC restorations was significantly higher compared to the conventional composite restorations (P<0.05).
Conclusion: FRC restorations significantly increased the fracture resistance of unsupported enamel compared to the conventional composite restorations under in vitro settings.
Materials and Methods: In this in vitro study, 30 freshly extracted sound premolars were randomly divided into three groups (n=10): (I) control group: intact teeth, (II) mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) preparation followed by restoration with Filtek P60 composite, and (III) deep MOD preparation and cusp reduction, followed by reinforcement with Interlig fiber ribbon, and subsequent restoration and cusp coverage with Filtek P60 composite. The teeth were stored in saline for one week. Next, their fracture resistance was measured by a universal testing machine. The load at fracture was recorded in Newtons (N). One-way ANOVA followed by the Tamhane post-hoc test was used to compare the groups (alpha=0.05).
Results: Fracture resistance of enamel in both experimental groups was significantly reduced compared to intact teeth (P<0.05). Fracture resistance of enamel in FRC restorations was significantly higher compared to the conventional composite restorations (P<0.05).
Conclusion: FRC restorations significantly increased the fracture resistance of unsupported enamel compared to the conventional composite restorations under in vitro settings.
Type of Study: Original article |
Subject:
Restorative Dentistry
References
1. Deliperi S, Alleman D, Rudo D. Stress-reduced Direct Composites for the Restoration of Structurally Compromised Teeth: Fiber Design According to the "Wallpapering" Technique. Oper Dent. 2017 May/Jun;42(3):233-43. [DOI:10.2341/15-289-T] [PMID]
2. Silva LR, de Lima KL, Santos AA, Leles CR, Estrela C, de Freitas Silva BS, Yamamoto-Silva FP. Dentin thickness as a risk factor for vertical root fracture in endodontically treated teeth: a case-control study. Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Mar;25(3):1099-5. [DOI:10.1007/s00784-020-03406-1] [PMID]
3. Deliperi S. Direct fiber-reinforced composite restoration in an endodontically-treated molar: a three-year case report. Oper Dent. 2008 Mar-Apr;33(2):209-14. [DOI:10.2341/07-99]
4. El-Mowafy O, El-Badrawy W, Eltanty A, Abbasi K, Habib N. Gingival microleakage of Class II resin composite restorations with fiber inserts. Oper Dent. 2007 May-Jun;32(3):298-305. [DOI:10.2341/06-86] [PMID]
5. Pizzolotto L, Moraes RR. Resin Composites in Posterior Teeth: Clinical Performance and Direct Restorative Techniques. Dent J (Basel). 2022 Nov 27;10(12):222. [DOI:10.3390/dj10120222] [PMID] []
6. de Gee AF, Feilzer AJ, Davidson CL. True linear polymerization shrinkage of unfilled resins and composites determined with a linometer. Dent Mater. 1993 Jan;9(1):11-4. [DOI:10.1016/0109-5641(93)90097-A] [PMID]
7. Yu P, Xu YX, Liu YS. Polymerization shrinkage and shrinkage stress of bulk-fill and non-bulk-fill resin-based composites. J Dent Sci. 2022 Jul;17(3):1212-1216. [DOI:10.1016/j.jds.2021.12.004] []
8. 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. Int Endod J. 2005 Feb;38(2):73-80. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00892.x] [PMID]
9. Brännström M. Communication between the oral cavity and the dental pulp associated with restorative treatment. Oper Dent. 1984 Spring;9(2):57-68.
10. Askar H, Krois J, Göstemeyer G, Schwendicke F. Secondary caries risk of different adhesive strategies and restorative materials in permanent teeth: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Dent. 2021 Jan;104:103541. [DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103541]
11. Rudo DN, Karbhari VM. Physical behaviors of fiber reinforcement as applied to tooth stabilization. Dent Clin North Am. 1999 Jan;43(1):7-35. [DOI:10.1016/S0011-8532(22)00504-3]
12. Deliperi S, Bardwell DN, Coiana C. Reconstruction of devital teeth using direct fiber-reinforced composite resins: a case report. J Adhes Dent. 2005 Summer;7(2):165-71.
13. Safwat EM, Khater AG, Abd-Elsatar AG, Khater GA. Glass fiber-reinforced composites in dentistry. Bulletin of the National Research Centre. 2021 Dec;45:1-9. [DOI:10.1186/s42269-021-00650-7]
14. Bae JM, Kim KN, Hattori M, Hasegawa K, Yoshinari M, Kawada E, et al. The flexural properties of fiber-reinforced composite with light-polymerized polymer matrix. Int J Prosthodont. 2001 Jan-Feb;14(1):33-9.
15. Halpin JC, Thomas RL. Ribbon reinforcement of composites. Journal of Composite Materials. 1968 Oct;2(4):488-97. [DOI:10.1177/002199836800200409]
16. Neri H, Aripin D, Muryani A, Dharsono HDA, Yolanda Y, Mahyuddin AI. Stress Analysis on Mesiolingual Cavity of Endodontically Treated Molar Restored Using Bidirectional Fiber-Reinforced Composite (Wallpapering Technique). Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2024 Apr 13;16:75-89. [DOI:10.2147/CCIDE.S450325] [PMID] []
17. Fráter M, Sáry T, Vincze-Bandi E, Volom A, Braunitzer G, Szabó P B, et al. Fracture Behavior of Short Fiber-Reinforced Direct Restorations in Large MOD Cavities. Polymers (Basel). 2021 Jun 23;13(13):2040. [DOI:10.3390/polym13132040] [PMID] []
18. Jalalian SH, Emami Arjomand M, Mahavi A. Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Strength of Cusp Coverage with Composite Versus Unsupported Enamel Reinforced with Composite in Posterior Dental Restorations. Journal of Research in Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences. 2018 Oct 10;3(4):26-32. [DOI:10.29252/jrdms.3.4.26]
19. Kirmah O, Sahin O, Aytac F, Sari F, Tugut F, Kustarci A. Comparison of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with MOD cavity using different techniques of fibre insertion. J Res Dent. 2014;2(3):144-48. [DOI:10.4103/2321-4619.143598]
20. Mondelli RF, Ishikiriama SK, de Oliveira Filho O, Mondelli J. Fracture resistance of weakened teeth restored with condensable resin with and without cusp coverage. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009 May-Jun;17(3):161-5. [DOI:10.1590/S1678-77572009000300006] [PMID] []
21. Moosavi H, Abedini S. The effect of various placement techniques on the microhardness of Class II (slot) resin composite restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2009 Sep 1;10(5):E009-16. [DOI:10.5005/jcdp-10-5-8]
22. Sáry T, Garoushi S, Braunitzer G, Alleman D, Volom A, Fráter M. Fracture behaviour of MOD restorations reinforced by various fibre-reinforced techniques - An in vitro study. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2019 Oct;98:348-56. [DOI:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.07.006] [PMID]
23. Everitt, B.S. and A. Skrondal, The Cambridge dictionary of statistics. 2010. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511779633]
24. El-Helali R, Dowling AH, McGinley EL, Duncan HF, Fleming GJ. Influence of resin-based composite restoration technique and endodontic access on cuspal deflection and cervical microleakage scores. J Dent. 2013 Mar;41(3):216-22. [DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2012.11.002] [PMID]
25. Plotino G, Buono L, Grande NM, Lamorgese V, Somma F. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated molars restored with extensive composite resin restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Mar;99(3):225-32. [DOI:10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60047-5] [PMID]
26. Jafari Navimipour E, Ebrahimi Chaharom ME, Alizadeh Oskoee P, Mohammadi N, Bahari M, Firouzmandi M. Fracture Resistance of Endodontically-treated Maxillary Premolars Restored with Composite Resin along with Glass Fiber Insertion in Different Positions. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2012 Fall;6(4):125-30.
27. Interlig fiber glass catalogue, 2016; 6 (Link: https://api.compodent.com/storage/files/PDF/INTERLIG_Low.pdf)
28. Filtek composite datasheet; 2019(Link: https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1354715O/technical-product-profile.pdf
29. 3M ESPE. 3M™ Single Bond Universal Adhesive:3M Company; 2014 (Link: https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/ media/1279637O/3m-single-bond-universal-adhesive- technical-product-profile.pdf)
30. Patnana AK, Vanga NRV, Vabbalareddy R, Chandrabhatla SK. Evaluating the fracture resistance of fiber reinforced composite restorations - An in vitro analysis. Indian J Dent Res. 2020 Jan-Feb;31(1):138-44. [DOI:10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_465_18] [PMID]
31. Albar NHM, Khayat WF. Evaluation of Fracture Strength of Fiber-Reinforced Direct Composite Resin Restorations: An In Vitro Study. Polymers (Basel). 2022 Oct 15;14(20):4339. [DOI:10.3390/polym14204339] [PMID] []
32. Scotti N, Forniglia A, Tempesta RM, Comba A, Saratti CM, Pasqualini D, et al. Effects of fiber-glass-reinforced composite restorations on fracture resistance and failure mode of endodontically treated molars. J Dent. 2016 Oct;53:82-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2016.08.001] [PMID]
33. Lassila L, Keulemans F, Säilynoja E, Vallittu PK, Garoushi S. Mechanical properties and fracture behavior of flowable fiber reinforced composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2018 Apr;34(4):598-606. [DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2018.01.002] [PMID]
34. Mangoush E, Garoushi S, Lassila L, Vallittu PK, Säilynoja E. Effect of Fiber Reinforcement Type on the Performance of Large Posterior Restorations: A Review of In Vitro Studies. Polymers (Basel). 2021 Oct 26;13(21):3682. [DOI:10.3390/polym13213682] [PMID] []
35. Dyer SR, Lassila LV, Jokinen M, Vallittu PK. Effect of cross-sectional design on the modulus of elasticity and toughness of fiber-reinforced composite materials. J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Sep;94(3):219-26. [DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.06.008] [PMID]
36. Daher R, Ardu S, Di Bella E, Rocca GT, Feilzer AJ, Krejci I. Fracture strength of non-invasively reinforced MOD cavities on endodontically treated teeth. Odontology. 2021 Apr;109(2):368-75. [DOI:10.1007/s10266-020-00552-6] [PMID] []
37. Bahari M, Mohammadi N, Kimyai S, Kahnamoui MA, Vahedpour H, Torkani MA, et al AS. Effect of different fiber reinforcement strategies on the fracture strength of composite resin restored endodontically treated premolars. Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada. 2019 Oct 31;19:e4465. [DOI:10.4034/PBOCI.2019.191.99]
38. Sengun A, Cobankara FK, Orucoglu H. Effect of a new restoration technique on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. Dent Traumatol. 2008 Apr;24(2):214-9. [DOI:10.1111/j.1600-9657.2007.00538.x] [PMID]
39. Cobankara FK, Unlu N, Cetin AR, Ozkan HB. The effect of different restoration techniques on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated molars. Oper Dent. 2008 Sep-Oct;33(5):526-33. [DOI:10.2341/07-132] [PMID]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
