Comparison on the Fracture Strength Depending on the Fiber Post and Core Build-up

섬유 강화 포스트와 코어 축성 방법에 따른 파절 강도에 관한 비교

  • Lee, Ja-Hyoung (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Shin, Sooyeon (Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Dankook University)
  • 이자형 (단국대학교 치과대학 보철학 교실) ;
  • 신수연 (단국대학교 치과대학 보철학 교실)
  • Received : 2009.07.12
  • Accepted : 2009.09.25
  • Published : 2009.09.30


A common procedure of restoration of endodonticlly treated tooth with fiber-reinforced post is followed by core build-up after post cementation. However, this technique is complex and time-consuming. The aim of this study was to compare fracture strength of premolar, restored with various methods of core fabrications on fiber-reinforced posts and casting metal restoration. Forty five freshly extracted human mandibular premolars were obtained and devided into 5 groups acconding to the type of post and methods of core build-up. In Group A, D.T. $Light-post^{(R)}$ were cemented with $DUO-LINK^{TM}$ and then $LIGHT-CORE^{TM}$ was used for core restoration. In Group B, D.T. $Light-post^{(R)}$ and $DUO-LINK^{TM}$ were used for cementing in the postspace, and $DUO-LINK^{TM}$ was used again for core restoration. In Group C, $Light-post^{(R)}$ bonding and the core build-up were performed simultaneously by using $DUO-LINK^{TM}$. In Group D, $LuxaPost^{(R)}$ was bonded by using $LuxaCore^{(R)}-Dual$. Again, $LuxaCore^{(R)}-Dual$ was used for core restoration. In Group E, $LuxaPost^{(R)}$ bonding and the core build-up were performed simultaneously by using $LuxaCore^{(R)}-Dual$. Axial reduction was formed parallelly as possible and 45 degree bevel was made at buccal occlusal surface. Crowns were fabricated and cemented. Each tooth was embedded in self-curing acrylic resin to the level of 2mm below the CEJ. Specimens were fixed on universal testing machin such that the axis of the tooth was at 45 degree inclination to the horizontal plane, and compressive force was applied at a crosshead speed of 1mm/min until failure occurred. The mean fracture strength was the highest in group A followed by descending order in group B, D, E and C. However, there were no statistically significant differences between groups with regard to the fracture strength. The type of the post or build-up methods of the core does not seem to influence the fracture strength.


Supported by : 단국대학교


  1. Nergiz I, Schmage P, Ozcan M, Platzer U. Effect of length and diameter of tapered posts on the retention. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29;28-34
  2. Lui JL. Composite resin reinforcement of flared canals using light-transmitting plastic posts. Quintessence Int 1994;25:313-9
  3. Malferrari S, Monaco C, Scotti R. Clinical evaluation of teeth restored with quartz fiber-reinforced epoxy resin posts. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16:39-44
  4. Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A, Heitmann T. Stiffness, elastic limit, and strength of newer types of endodontic posts. J Dent 1999:27:275-8
  5. Ahmad I. Zirconium oxide post and core system for the restoration of an endodontically treated incisor. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1999;11:197-204
  6. Goto Y, Nicholls JI, Phillips KM, Junge T. Fatigue resistance of endodontically-treated teeth restored with three dowel-and-core systems. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93(1):45-50
  7. Pereira JR, de Ornelas F, Conti PC, do Valle AL. Effect of a crown ferrule on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with prefabricated posts. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 95(1):50-4
  8. Freeman MA, Nicholls JI, Kydd WL, Harrington GW. Leakage associated with load fatigue-induced preliminary failure of full crowns placed over three different post and core systems. J Endod 1998;24: 26-32
  9. Cohen S, Burns RC. Pathway of the pulp, 6ed. St Louis 1994; 604-32
  10. Akkayan B. An in vitro study evaluating the effect of ferrule length on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with fiber-reinforced and zirconia dowel systems. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92(2): 155-62
  11. Oliva RA, Lowe JA. Dimensional stability of composite used as a core material. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56:554
  12. Akkayan B, Gulmez T. Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post systems. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87:431-7
  13. Stockton LW. Factors affecting retention of post systems: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81;380-5
  14. Shim DW, Shim JS, Lee KW. The fracture characteristics of glass fiber post and core on using different types of core resin materials. Korean J Clinical Dentistry 2004;3:66-7
  15. Nash RW. The use of posts for endodontically treated teeth. Compend contin Educ Dent 1998;19:1054-62
  16. Dietschi D, Romelli M, Goretti A. Adaptation of adhesive posts and cores to dentin after fatigue testing. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:498-507
  17. Barjau-Escribano A, Sancho-Bru JL, Forner-Navarro L, Rodriquez-Cervantes PJ, Pérez-González A, Sánchez-Marín FT. Influence of prefabricated post material on restored teeth: Fracture strength and stress distribution. Oper Dent 2006;31(1):47-54
  18. Tay FR, Loushine RJ, Lambrecht P, Weller RN, Pashley DH. Geometric factors affecting dentin bonding in root canals: a theoretical modeling approach. J Endod 2005;31;584-9
  19. Peters MC, Poort HW, Farah JW, Craig RG. Stress analysis of a tooth restored with a post and core. J Dent Res 1983;62:760-3
  20. Kovarik RE, Breeding LC, Caughman WF. Fatigue life of three core materials under simulated chewing conditions. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:584-90
  21. Mannocci F, Qualtrough AJ, Worthington HV, Watson TF, Pitt Ford TR. Randomized clinical comparison of endodontically treated teeth restored with amalgam or with fiber posts and resin composite: Five-year results2005; 30(1):9-15
  22. Assif D, Gorfil C. Biomechanical considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71;565-7
  23. Mezzomo E, Massa F, Libera SD. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with two different post-and-core designs cemented with two different cements: An in vitro study Part I. Quintessence Int 2003;34(4):301-6
  24. Hu YH, Pang LC, Hsu CC, Lau YH. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated anterior teeth restored with four post-and-core systems. Quintessence Int 2003;34:349-53
  25. Ferrari M, Vichi A, Grandini S. Efficacy of different adhesive techniques on bonding to root walls: an SEM investigation. Dent Mater 2001;17:422-9
  26. Sorensen JA, Engelman MJ. Effect of post adaptation on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:419-24
  27. Johnson JK, Sakumura JS. Dowel form and tensile force. J Prosthet Dent 1978;40:645-9
  28. Lyons MF, Baxendale RH. A preliminary electromyography study of bite force and jaw-closing muscle fatigue in human subjects with advanced tooth wear. J Oral Rehabil 1990;17:311-8
  29. Mannocci F, Ferrary M, Waston TF. Intermittent loading of teeth restored using quartz fiber, carbon-quartz fiber, and zirconium dioxide ceramic root canal posts. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:153-8
  30. Yaman P, Thorsteinsson TS. Effect of core materials on stress distribution of posts. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:416-20
  31. Tan PLB, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, Stanford CM, Tan SC, Johnson WT, Dawson D. In vitro fracture resistance of endodontically treated central incisors with varying ferrule heights and configurations. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93(4):331-6
  32. Larson TD, Jensen JR. Microleakage of composite resin and amalgam core material under complete cast crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1980;44:40
  33. Guzy GE, Nicholls JI. In vitro comparison of intact endodontically treated teeth with and without endo-post reinforcement. J Prosthet Dent 1979;42: 39-44