Sushma Chandra1 , Chandrasekhar Manduru2 , Gopikrishna Reddy Moosani3 , Nagalakshmi Reddy Sampathi4 , Upendranatha Reddy Nagireddy5 , Raghavalli Medepalli6 , Sreeja Yadav Malla7 , Swathi Miskin8
BACKGROUND We wanted to investigate in vitro the fracture resistance (FR) of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with a conservative access cavity restored using three different restorative materials. METHODS Forty freshly extracted human mandibular molars were collected. All teeth were cleaned of tissue fragments and visible debris by ultrasonic scaler and were stored in saline. The collected teeth were divided into four groups of 10 specimens each. Teeth were randomly allocated into the four groups 'Group 1', 'Group 2', 'Group 3', 'Group 4','. Group 1: control group, sound teeth without any preparation or restoration; Group 2: conservative endodontic access cavity (CEAC), RCT, and amalgam restoration; Group 3: CEAC, RCT and restored with direct composite restoration; Group 4: CEAC, RCT and restored with Cention N. The fracture load was determined in newton (N), and the mode of fracture was recorded and classified by using a stereomicroscope. RESULTS Among the four groups, Group 1 (control group) had the highest fracture resistance (2.390 KN). This difference was significant with p<0.05. There was a significant difference between the control group and ETT groups. Within the Endodontically treated groups, group 3 (composite, 1.300 KN) had the highest fracture resistance followed by group 4 (1.24 KN) and group 2 (amalgam 1.192 KN). With regard to the type of fracture, the composite group had 100% unfavourable fractures, whereas the Cention N group showed more favourable fractures when compared to other groups. CONCLUSIONS All restorative techniques tested led to a significant reduction in fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular molars. Cention N had more favourable fractures than composite and amalgam even though composite had the highest fracture resistance.
