4.6 Article

Effect of Restorative Material on Mechanical Response of Provisional Endocrowns: A 3D-FEA Study

期刊

MATERIALS
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14030649

关键词

dental restoration failure; endodontically treated teeth; finite element analysis; dental materials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the stress distribution in an endocrown restoration with different provisional restorative materials. It found that using resin composite for provisional endocrowns can reduce stresses in the cement layer and dental tissue surfaces.
The goal of this study was to evaluate the stress distribution in an endocrown restoration according to different provisional restorative materials. An endodontically treated maxillary molar model was selected for conducting the finite element analysis (FEA), with a determined amount of dental remnant of 1.5 mm. The model was imported to the analysis software (ANSYS 19.2, ANSYS Inc., Houston, TX, USA) in STEP format. All contacts were considered perfectly bonded. The mechanical properties of each structure were considered isotropic, linear, elastic, and homogeneous. Three different provisional restorative materials were simulated (acrylic resin, bis-acrylic resin, and resin composite). An axial load (300 N) was applied at the occlusal surface in the center of the restoration. Results were determined by colorimetric stress maps of maximum principal stress, maximum shear stress, and total deformation. The different materials influenced the stress distribution for all structures; the higher the material's elastic modulus, the lower the stress magnitude on the cement layer. In the present study, all provisional restorative materials showed similar stress patterns in the endocrown and on the cement layer however, with different magnitude. Based on this study limitation, the use of resin composite to manufacture provisional endocrowns is suggested as a promising material to reduce the stresses in the cement layer and in the dental tissue surfaces.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据