Display options
Share it on

Springerplus. 2015 Oct 13;4:598. doi: 10.1186/s40064-015-1345-4. eCollection 2015.

3D FEA of cemented glass fiber and cast posts with various dental cements in a maxillary central incisor.

SpringerPlus

Ahmed A Madfa, Mohsen A Al-Hamzi, Fadhel A Al-Sanabani, Nasr H Al-Qudaimi, Xiao-Guang Yue

Affiliations

  1. Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Thamar, Dhamar, Yemen.
  2. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Preventive Dentistry and Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Thamar, Dhamar, Yemen.
  3. Department of Safety Science and Engineering, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan, China.

PMID: 26543733 PMCID: PMC4627971 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-015-1345-4

Abstract

This study aimed to analyse and compare the stability of two dental posts cemented with four different luting agents by examining their shear stress transfer through the FEM. Eight three-dimensional finite element models of a maxillary central incisor restored with glass fiber and Ni-Cr alloy cast dental posts. Each dental post was luted with zinc phosphate, Panavia resin, super bond C&B resin and glass ionomer materials. Finite element models were constructed and oblique loading of 100 N was applied. The distribution of shear stress was investigated at posts and cement/dentine interfaces using ABAQUS/CAE software. The peak shear stress for glass fiber post models minimized approximately three to four times of those for Ni-Cr alloy cast post models. There was negligible difference in peak of shear stress when various cements were compared, irrespective of post materials. The shear stress had same trend for all cement materials. This study found that the glass fiber dental post reduced the shear stress concentration at interfacial of post and cement/dentine compared to Ni-Cr alloy cast dental post.

Keywords: Biomechanics; Dental cement; Dental post; Finite element method; Shear stress

References

  1. J Prosthet Dent. 2001 Jul;86(1):74-80 - PubMed
  2. Dent Update. 2000 Sep;27(7):350-4 - PubMed
  3. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2003;15(1):25-30; discussion 31 - PubMed
  4. J Prosthet Dent. 1996 Feb;75(2):140-7 - PubMed
  5. Am J Dent. 2000 May;13(Spec No):9B-13B - PubMed
  6. Biomaterials. 2002 Jul;23(13):2667-82 - PubMed
  7. Gen Dent. 2000 Nov-Dec;48(6):700-6 - PubMed
  8. J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Oct;94(4):321-9 - PubMed
  9. J Prosthet Dent. 1992 Apr;67(4):454-8 - PubMed
  10. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1987 Feb;3(1):10-4 - PubMed
  11. J Oral Rehabil. 2006 Sep;33(9):690-7 - PubMed
  12. Am J Dent. 2007 Dec;20(6):353-60 - PubMed
  13. Dent Mater. 2007 Sep;23(9):1086-92 - PubMed
  14. J Prosthet Dent. 1984 Jun;51(6):780-4 - PubMed
  15. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1994 Dec;22(6):448-52 - PubMed
  16. J Dent. 1989 Apr;17(2):61-7 - PubMed
  17. Med Eng Phys. 2014 Jul;36(7):962-7 - PubMed
  18. Dent Clin North Am. 2007 Jul;51(3):643-58, vi - PubMed
  19. J Prosthet Dent. 1995 May;73(5):439-44 - PubMed
  20. J Adhes Dent. 2001 Summer;3(2):123-7 - PubMed
  21. Dent Mater. 2010 Feb;26(2):e100-21 - PubMed
  22. Dent Mater. 2002 Dec;18(8):596-602 - PubMed
  23. Dent Mater J. 2011;30(6):869-80 - PubMed
  24. Int J Prosthodont. 2001 Nov-Dec;14(6):543-9 - PubMed
  25. Dent Mater. 2005 Aug;21(8):709-15 - PubMed
  26. J Prosthet Dent. 1989 Jan;61(1):10-5 - PubMed
  27. J Endod. 2009 Jan;35(1):117-20 - PubMed
  28. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2003 Apr;24(4):275-8, 280-2; quiz 284 - PubMed
  29. J Clin Periodontol. 1995 Nov;22(11):850-3 - PubMed
  30. Eur J Oral Sci. 1999 Jun;107(3):220-4 - PubMed
  31. J Endod. 2004 May;30(5):289-301 - PubMed
  32. Dent Mater. 2010 Feb;26(2):e78-93 - PubMed
  33. J Am Dent Assoc. 2011 Mar;142(3):289-300 - PubMed
  34. J Prosthet Dent. 1994 Dec;72(6):591-4 - PubMed
  35. Dent Mater. 2008 Jul;24(7):944-50 - PubMed
  36. Dent Mater. 2003 May;19(3):199-205 - PubMed

Publication Types