ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Comparative assessment of fracture resistance in endodontically treated maxillary premolars: influence of cusp coverage and fiber ribbon placement strategies.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the effects of cusp reduction and different quartz fiber-ribbon placement strategies on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary first premolars with mesio-occlusal (MO) cavities. MATERIALS AND
methodsFlexural strength was measured in composite resin and fiber-reinforced composite resin blocks. Finite element analysis (FEA) was performed to compare five restorative designs (EC, FC, CEC, CBFC, and CCFC) in the endodontically treated first premolar. Fracture strength of the repaired extracted teeth were also conducted, fracture loads and failure modes were recorded. One-way ANOVA and Chi-square tests were used (α = 0.05).
resultsQuartz fiber reinforcement significantly increased flexural strength compared with composite resin alone (P < 0.05). FEA showed that the cusp-reduced restoration with coronal fiber placement generated the lowest cervical stress concentration, whereas the composite-only design showed the highest. In fracture testing, the cusp-reduced restoration with coronal fiber placement exhibited the highest fracture load and was significantly stronger than all other groups (P < 0.05). More non-repairable fractures were observed in the cusp-reduced composite-only and basal-fiber groups.
conclusionsCusp reduction combined with coronal quartz fiber-ribbon placement provided the most favorable biomechanical behavior and the highest fracture resistance. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Premolars with single-wall defects are at relatively high risk of fracture with direct restorations. Coronal fiber-reinforced cusp-coverage direct restoration may be a conservative option for restoring structurally compromised endodontically treated premolars.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42530677What 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.