ArticleOral health & preventive dentistry2022
Fracture Resistance of Root-Canal Treated Premolars Restored with Dentin Replacement Materials: An In-vitro Study.
Article in Oral health & preventive dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of fracture resistance in endodontically treated premolars restored using various bulk-fill composites.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Retention of strength and ion release of some restorative materials.Odontology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeConservative restorations of endodontically treated premolars have yielded mixed results. The present study aimed to compare fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars with Class II mesial-occlusal cavity preparations, restored with either Smart Dentin Replacement (SDR; Dentsply Sirona) material, Biodentine (Septodont) or ceramic inlays. MATERIALS AND
methodsThirty-two extracted premolars were randomly divided into four equal groups (n = 8): Group 1 served as a control group with teeth left intact; teeth in the remaining three groups received root canal treatment followed by a mesio-occlusal cavity preparation. These crowns were restored with: Biodentine in group 2, SDR in group 3 and ceramic inlays in group 4. A computer-controlled Instron universal testing machine subjected all specimens to compressive load until failure. Force at failure and fracture mode (above or below the cementoenamel junction) were recorded. The data were analysed using Fisher's exact test and one-way ANOVA followed by the post-hoc Tukey's test. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsThe lowest mean load at failure was recorded for the inlay group. Loads at failure were statistically significantly higher for teeth restored with Biodentine than with SDR (p = 0.012) and ceramic inlays (p = 0.007). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of fracture mode (p = 0.440).
conclusionEndodontically treated premolars with mesial-occlusal cavity preparation restored with Biodentine were more resistant to fracture than those restored with either SDR or ceramic inlays. Biodentine may prove a promising material to restore endodontically treated teeth with one missing proximal wall.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.