Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with or without post systems

Background/purpose m of this study was to determine and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with or without posts. als and methods ged, extracted human premolar teeth (48 in total) were randomly divided into four groups of 12 each. Clinical crowns of the teeth were cut 3 mm coronal to the cementoenamel junction. Root canals were enlarged using rotary canal instruments (Dentsply) and filled with gutta-percha (Dentsply) as well as a sealer (AH 26, De Trey). In all groups, gutta-percha was removed, and the post space was prepared using tapered drills (FRC Postec post kit, Ivoclar Vivadent). The first group of fiber-reinforced composite posts (FRC Postec Plus, Ivoclar Vivadent) and the second group of Ever Stick posts (Stick Tech) were luted into the root canals using dual curing resin cement (Variolink II, Ivoclar Vivadent). In the third group, post spaces were filled using a hybrid resin composite (Tetric Evo Ceram, Ivoclar Vivadent). The fourth group served as a control with direct resin composite core reconstruction formed without a post. Composite cores were constructed with a hybrid resin composite (Tetric Evo Ceram, Ivoclar Vivadent) in all groups. Fracture loading was accomplished using an universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min in compression mode. s were no statistically significant differences between the fracture resistance values for the four experimental groups (P > 0.05). sions reinforced posts can be used as a core material in endodontically treated teeth as well as composite core reconstructions.