Basic ResearchTechnology

The Effect of Different Full-coverage Crown Systems on

Fracture Resistance and Failure Pattern of Endodontically
Treated Maxillary Incisors Restored with and without
Glass Fiber Posts
Ziad Salameh,* Roberto Sorrentino, Hani F. Ounsi,* Walid Sadig, Fadi Atiyeh,*
and Marco Ferrari
Abstract
The aim of this study was to compare the fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated maxillary incisors restored using composite resin with or without fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) posts under different
types of full-coverage crowns. The null hypothesis tested
was that fracture resistance and the failure pattern of
these teeth were not affected by the use of FRC posts or
by the type of full-coverage crown. One hundred twenty
maxillary incisors were endodontically treated and divided
into 4 groups of 30 each. Each group was divided into two
subgroups: restoration with or without fiber post. PFM
crowns were placed in group 1, Empress II crowns in
group 2, SR Adoro crowns in group 3, and Cercon crowns
in group 4. Fracture tests were performed by loading
specimens to fracture. Data were analyzed with two-way
analysis of variance ( 0.05). The type of crown was not
a significant factor affecting fracture resistance (p 0.4),
whereas the presence of a post was (p 0.001). Both the
presence of post and the type of crown had a significant
influence on the proportion of restorable versus unrestorable fractures. Although prosthodontics textbooks do not
generally advocate the placement of fiber posts in endodontically treated incisors, the results of this study indicate that the use of fiber posts in such teeth increases their
resistance to fracture and improves the prognosis in case
of fracture. (J Endod 2008;34:842 846)

Key Words
Endodontically treated teeth, fiber post, fracture pattern, fracture resistance, full-coverage crown

From the *Department of Research, School of Dentistry, Lebanese University, Beirut, Lebanon; Department of Dental Materials,
School of Dental Medicine, University of Siena, Italy; Department
of Fixed Prosthodontics, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy; Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of
Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Supported by the College of Dentistry Research Center of
King Saud University in Riyadh KSA (grant no. F1149).
Address requests for reprints to Dr Marco Ferrari, Dipartimento di Scienze Odontostomatologiche, Universit degli
Studi di Siena, Policlinico Le Scotte, Viale Bracci, 53100 Siena,
Italy. E-mail address: ferrarimar@unisi.it.
0099-2399/$0 - see front matter
Copyright 2008 American Association of Endodontists.
doi:10.1016/j.joen.2008.03.025

842

Salameh et al.

ndodontically treated teeth (ETT) planned for fixed prosthodontic treatment often
require post and core restorations for retention purposes because of extensive
structural defects resulting from caries and access cavity preparation (1). Metallic posts
showed poor stress distribution because of an elastic modulus very different from that
of dentin, which, in turn, led to root fracture (2, 3). Nevertheless, they are still considered as the gold standard in anterior restorations (4, 5). The introduction of fiberreinforced composite (FRC) posts helped improve stress distribution because their
elastic modulus was shown to be closer to that of dentin by in vivo (6, 7) and in vitro
research (8, 9). Although FRC posts proved effective in withstanding compressive loads
in posterior teeth (10, 11), they behave differently in anterior teeth in which nonaxial
forces prevail and in which their flexural behavior played an important role (12).
Furthermore, when complex dental restoration was considered, interfaces between
dentine, cement, post, core, and crown could undergo different stress concentrations
because of their different mechanical characteristics (13).
Recent studies (11, 14) suggested that FRC posts contributed to the reinforcement
and strengthening of ETT under full-coverage crowns, and porcelain-fused-to-metal
(PFM) crowns have been used extensively in fixed prosthodontics to restore ETT (15).
All-ceramic crowns have been introduced during the past 15 years, but improved
esthetics came with greater failure rates because mechanical properties of all-ceramic
crowns were inferior to those of PFM crowns (16). The introduction of aluminum and
zirconium oxide ceramics has allowed improved mechanical properties (15). Lately,
polymer crowns have also been promoted as an inexpensive alternative to metal-ceramic crowns (17). Although these crowns have different mechanical properties, no
studies were designed to access their influence on fracture resistance or failure pattern
of ETT. Recently, a finite element analysis study by Sorrentino et al. (14) that attempted
to analyze the stresses involved showed that the mechanical properties of the crown and
core material influenced the level of stress and strain along the dentin/cement/post
interface, although they only studied feldspathic porcelain and composite restorations.
Furthermore, in finite element analysis, assumptions related to material properties or
simulated structures are not usually absolute representations of the reality in which the
structures are more dynamic. Moreover, the physical characteristics of tissues tend to
vary from site to site and from individual to individual (14).
The aim of the present study was to compare the fracture resistance and failure
pattern of endodontically treated maxillary incisors restored using composite resin with
or without FRC posts with different types of full-coverage crowns. The null hypothesis
tested was that the fracture resistance and failure pattern of ETT was not affected by the
use of FRC posts or by the type of full-coverage crown.

Materials and Methods

One hundred twenty human maxillary incisors free from caries or previous restorations were selected for the study. They were cleaned of external debris, examined by
transillumination for presence of cracks, and stored in an incubator at 37C at 90%
relative humidity before mechanical testing. The pulp chamber of each tooth was accessed following a standardized procedure. Canal patency was achieved by passing a
size #10 K-file (Dentsply-Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) into the root canal until its

JOE Volume 34, Number 7, July 2008

Basic ResearchTechnology
tip was visible at the apical foramen. Root canals were instrumented by
using stainless steel K-files #10, 15, 20 (Dentsply-Maillefer, Ballaigues,
Switzerland) and Glyde (Dentsply-Maillefer) to the working length,
which was established at 1 mm from the foramen. Shaping was continued using rotary nickel-titanium instruments (ProTaper, DentsplyMaillefer) according to the manufacturers instructions to F2 size (8%
taper, 20/100 tip diameter). Root canals were irrigated between instrumentation with 2 mL of 5.25% sodium hypochlorite. After gauging and
tuning to size 50, teeth were obturated by using the warm vertical condensation technique using calibrated gutta-percha points (F2, DentsplyMaillefer) and an endodontic sealer (AH26, Dentsply-Maillefer).
Crowns were sectioned 2 mm above the cementoenamel junction
to allow for ferrule length. Each tooth was embedded in a block of
self-curing acrylic resin (Jet Kit; Lang Dental Manufacturing Co, Wheeling, IL) with the long axis perpendicular to the base of the block and
with the acrylic ending at 2 mm below the cementoenamel junction.
Before embedding, a thin layer of glycerin was first applied with a
microbrush on the roots, and the tooth was carefully removed after
polymerization of the acrylic resin. An addition-polyvinylsiloxane
(Flexitime; Heraeus-Kulzer, Hanau, Germany) was injected into the
acrylic resin molds and the tooth was inserted again, with the cured
polyvinylsiloxane material simulating the periodontal ligament. The
teeth were randomly distributed in 4 groups of 30 teeth each. Each
group was divided into two subgroups (A, without FRC post and B, with
FRC post) and the restoration performed. In subgroups B, gutta-percha
was removed with a Largo drill no. 1 (Dentsply-Maillefer) to a depth of
9 mm, keeping at least 5 mm of root filling intact to preserve the apical
seal. A post space was prepared with calibrating drills, and 17% EDTA
was used to clean the root canal. Translucent glass-fiber posts #1 (FRC
Postec Plus; Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) composed of glass
fibers embedded in a composite matrix that contains dimethacrylate
and yetterbium fluoride was used. Each post was cut to an adequate
length with a diamond bur to extend 2 mm occlusally from the tooth
surface. Post surfaces were cleaned with 37% etching gel for 60 seconds
(Total Etch, Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), rinsed with water,
and dried. The post surfaces were treated with a silane coupling agent
(Monobond-S, Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) for 60 seconds
and air dried. The canal walls were etched with 37% phosphoric acid
for 15 seconds, rinsed, and dried with paper points. A dual-curing
single-component adhesive composed of a microbrush coated with the
initiators that dissolve when the brush is brought in contact with the
adhesive solution (Excite DSC, Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein)
was applied to the canal walls and excess material removed using paper
points. The posts were then luted with a dual-curing flowable resin core
buildup (Multicore Flow, Ivoclar-Vivadent) composed of dimethacrylates and inorganic fillers and light cured using a halogen light-curing
unit (Astralis 10, Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtensteint) for 40 seconds with the tip of the unit directly in contact with the post. In all
specimens, core buildup was performed by using Multicore Flow (Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) using a 4-mm high transparent
template for consistency between samples.

rounded transitional areas and edges. For metal-free polymer crowns

(ADORO SR; Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein, group 3), labial
and lingual surfaces were reduced by 1 mm and occlusal surface by 2
mm, with rounded transitional areas and edges. A single-stage impression was made using polyvinylsiloxane impression material (Virtual,
Ivoclar-Vivadent).
For group 1, the metal coping was waxed and casted with type III
reduced gold content alloy (Midas, Jelenko-Heraeus Kulzer). Feldspathic porcelain was later used to veneer the crown (IPS Design, Ivoclar-Vivadent). For group 2, the lithium disilicate ingots were pressed
and the frameworks were then layered with apatite sintered glass ceramic and fired (IPS Impress 2). For group 3, the crowns were obtained
by placing Vectris Singles (Ivoclar-Vivadent) to form the fiber-reinforced substructures and then veneered using a copolymer incorporating high loading of inorganic microfillers (SR Adoro,Ivoclar-Vivadent).
For group 4, dies were digitized using the Cercon-scanner (Cercon Eye,
Degudent, Germany) and transmitted to a computer where the copings
were designed then milled from nonsintered yttria-stabilized zirconia
blocks in the CAM unit. Subsequent fitting adjustments after sintering
were made using rotary diamond instruments under water cooling. The
veneering process was carried out according to manufacturers instructions (Kiss, Degudent). A template was used in all groups to ensure
shape consistency between samples.

Cementation
Cementation of the crowns was performed using self-cured resin
cement (Multilink, Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein). For group
1, the inner surface of the crowns was sandblasted with 50 m alumina
powder, rinsed with water spray, and dried. A thin layer of metal primer
was applied and then air dried. Multilink primer liquids were mixed and
applied on the whole tooth surface and brushed for 15 seconds. Multilink resin cement was dispensed from the automix syringe directly to
the inner surface of the crowns. The restorations were seated and held
in position; gross excess was removed immediately with a microbrush.
For group 2, crowns were pretreated with hydrofluoric acid (IPS ceramic etching gel, Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) for 20 seconds, rinsed off, air dried, silanized with Monobond-S for 60 seconds,
and air dried. The rest of the cementation procedures was similar to
those of group 1. For group 4, a thin layer of zirconia primer (IvoclarVivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) was applied and then air dried for 60
seconds. The rest of the cementation procedures were similar to those
of group 2. For group 3, similar procedures to those described for
group 2 were used but without etching the inner surface of the crowns.
In all groups, restoration margins were covered with glycerine gel after
the removal of excess cement and rinsed off after complete polymerization of the resin cement.

Impression Taking and Crown Procedures

Chamfer preparation was performed for each restored tooth using
a surveyor combined with a high-speed turbine and water spray. Preparation of the labial, proximal, occlusal, and lingual surfaces was performed according to the requirements of the final restoration. For PFM
crowns (group 1), labial and lingual surfaces were reduced by 1.5 mm
and occlusal by 2 mm, with rounded transitional areas and edges. For
IPS Empress II (Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) (group 2) and
Zirconia crowns (Cercon, Degudent, Germany) (group 4), labial and
lingual surfaces were reduced by 1.5 mm and occlusal by 2 mm, with

Fracture Test
A universal loading machine (Triaxal Tester T400 Digital; Controls
srl, Cernusco s/N., Italy) was used. Each specimen was inserted into the
holding device, and a controlled load was applied using a stainless steel
rod with a 2-mm tip diameter at a 45 angulation to the longitudinal axis
of the tooth. Pressure from the rod tip was applied at a crosshead
speed of 1 mm/min applied 3 mm below the incisal edge on the
palatal surface of the crown. All specimens were loaded until fracture
and the maximum breaking loads were recorded in newtons. After
mechanical failure, all fractured specimens were perfused with Indian
ink to highlight fracture lines. The failure mode was visually evaluated
and classified as restorable or nonrestorable. Restorable specimens
were inspected for microcracks using a stereomicroscope (Zeiss OpMi1;
Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany) at 10 magnification.

JOE Volume 34, Number 7, July 2008

Fracture Resistance and Failure in Endodontically Treated Maxillary Incisors

843

Basic ResearchTechnology
TABLE 1. Means and Standard Deviations (in newtons) of the Fracture Loads
Obtained for All Groups
Crown Type

Presence
of Post

Mean

SD

Significance

No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes

15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15

781,67
895,94
728,7
837,17
728,58
843,42
803,79
840,21

215,6
198,69
144,46
127,95
133,13
111,87
137,52
113,44

A
B
A
B
A
B
A
B

PFM
Empress II
SR Adoro
Cercon

Statistically comparable groups are labeled with the same letter.

SD standard deviation.

Data were statistically analyzed using SPSS 12.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL). Because distribution was normal and variances were homogenous, the two-way analysis of variance was applied with fracture resistance as the dependent variable and the presence/absence of post and
type of crown as factors. The level of significance was set at 0.05.

Results
Two-way analysis of variance revealed that the type of crown was
not a significant factor affecting fracture resistance (p 0.4), whereas
the presence/absence of a post was a significant factor (p 0.001)
because teeth restored with FRC posts displayed higher resistance values (Table 1). The presence/absence of the post had a significant influence on the proportion of restorable versus unrestorable fractures
(Pearson chi-square, p 0.002; Fig. 1). The type of crown had a
significant influence on the proportion of restorable versus unrestorable fractures (Pearson chi-square, p 0.02; Fig. 2). In particular,
PFM crowns had a significantly higher frequency of unrestorable fractures than SR Adoro (Pearson chi-square, p 0.038) and Cercon
crowns (Pearson chi-square, p 0.009); Empress 2 crowns had a
significantly higher frequency of unrestorable fractures than Cercon
crowns (Pearson chi-square, p 0.035).

Discussion
This study was designed to assess the fracture resistance and failure pattern of maxillary incisors restored using a microhybrid composite with or without placement of FRC posts, with different types of full-

crown coverage. Although this study reproduced the scenario of major

loss of natural tooth structure, it retained the presence of a 2-mm
ferrule of sound dentin. When the ferrule effect is absent, forces are
concentrated at the junction of the post and the core (18), and the post
is more likely to fracture, whereas, with the ferrule, stresses are redistributed in the outer surface regions of the coronal third of the root
(19). A layer of cured polyvinylsiloxane was used to simulate the periodontium because its presence was found to significantly affect the
results of fracture testing (20). Moreover, because preparation procedures are critical for all-ceramic restorations (21), a surveyor was used
to ensure the reproducibility of core shapes. An epoxy resin-based
endodontic root canal sealer was used to avoid the potential effect of
eugenol-containing sealers on the adhesion between root dentin, luting
agents and FRC posts. Within the limitations of this study and regarding
the influence of the crown type on fracture resistance, we had to accept
the null hypothesis because there was no significant difference. However, the presence or absence of FRC posts resulted in a significant
difference whether regarding fracture resistance or failure pattern, and,
in that aspect, the null hypothesis had to be rejected.
A recent study by Salameh et al. (11) proported that the use of FRC
post with full-coverage crown to restore endodonticaly treated maxillary
premolars improved the biomechanical perfomance under vertical
static loading, implying that the posts significantly contributed to the
reinforcement and strengthening of ETT by supporting the remaining
tooth structure against vertical compressive stresses. It should be noted
that under a 45 oblique load, teeth behave mechanically like a cantilever (22). In this situation, the recorded failure loads would primarily
represent the bending resistance of the cantilever, which is in this case
a hybrid structure including the root, the crown, and the post and core
(14, 22). Under such conditions, Hayashi et al. (23) suggested that
posts with a high elastic modulus such as metallic posts could improve
the bending resistance of post-restored teeth by opposing their stiffness
to the bending stresses arising from function. However, higher elasticity
moduli would be more prone to cause unrestorable fracture patterns
(24), whereas posts with lower elastic moduli such as glass-FRC posts
seem to improve the bending resistance and produce failure patterns
that are more easily restorable (2325).
It has been reported, however, that the maximum incisal forces of
anterior teeth were almost always below 200 N (22, 26). In the present
study, fracture loads in all groups were found to be superior (728.5
895.9 N) to the ordinary chewing force and even greater than the max-

Figure 1. The relation between placement of fiber posts in endodontically treated teeth and the type of tooth fracture exhibited after oblique loading stresses. Fracture
patterns are significantly more favorable in the presence of a fiber post.

844

Salameh et al.

JOE Volume 34, Number 7, July 2008

Basic ResearchTechnology

Figure 2. (A) Restorable fractures were characterized by horizontal fractures, oblique fractures not reaching the cementoenamel junction, or fractures of the
restoration. Conversely, (B) unrestorable fractures were characterized by vertical fractures or oblique fractures violating the cementoenamel junction.

imum biting force. Therefore, it may be suggested that anterior teeth

with a 2-mm ferrule restored with an FRC post and full-coverage crown
would resist normal occlusal forces.
Dietschi et al. (27) showed that after cyclic loading isotropic posts
with high stiffness values behave less efficiently than their anisotropic
fiber-reinforced counterparts because of interfacial defects. This was
confirmed by the results obtained in a mathematical simulation by Sorrentino et al. (14) that showed that the higher the rigidity of the crown
and core materials, the more apical the stress and strain concentrations
along the adhesive interfaces.
In terms of failure modes, our results were in concordance with
other results showing that the use of FRC posts to restore ETT will
produce favorable fracture patterns by having restorable fractures
(11, 13, 22, 28). This can be explained by the stress distribution in
ETT restored with FRC posts, composite core, and full-coverage
crowns as described by recent studies (11). With regards to crown
type, results show that in the presence of FRC post fracture patterns
were more favorable especially with PFM and Empress crowns. The
mechanical properties of the crown core material influence the
stress concentration (29).
In the present study, PFM and Empress crowns seemed to produce
a shielding effect on the core materials and, as a consequence, deformations concentrated on root dentin next to the prosthetic crown interface. Sorrentino et al. (14) explain that on one side, root dentin
absorbed part of the strain, but, on the other side, it conveyed limited
deformations to the glass post stress arose at the root interface because
of the difference in mechanical resistance between the post and the
dentin. In the case of SR Adoro crowns, the lower resistance to deformation of the composite crown produced higher deformation values in
the core structure transferred to the coronal part of the glass post
causing a stress concentration at the crown interface leading to fracture
of the crown before critical loads could be transferred to the root dentin
(30). Surprisingly, Zirconia crowns seemed to exhibit better behavior
than other types of crowns when compared with their subgroup counterparts. This could be explained by a stress absorption phenomenon
relative to the material itself because it uses stresses to initiate phase

transformation from the tetragonal to the monoclinic phase (31) and

warrants further investigations.
Further research remains required to assess the behavior of ETT
restored using FRC posts and composite cores with full-coverage
crowns under cyclic loading or in chewing conditions. It should also be
noted that different restoration patterns beneath the crown might alter
the mechanical behavior of the final restoration.

JOE Volume 34, Number 7, July 2008

Fracture Resistance and Failure in Endodontically Treated Maxillary Incisors

References
1. Tokasvul S, Zor M, Toman M, Gungor MA, Nergiz I, Artunc C. Analysis of dentinal
stress distribution of maxillary central incisors subjected to various post-and-core
applications. Oper Dent 2006;31:89 96.
2. Sirimai S, Riis DN, Morgano SM. An in vivo study of the fracture resistance and the
incidence of vertical root fracture of pulpless teeth restored with six post-and-core
systems. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:2629.
3. Albuquerque Rde C, Polleto LT, Fontana RH, Cimini CA. Stress analysis of an upper
central incisor restored with different posts. J Oral Rehabil 2003;30:936 43.
4. Heydecke G, Peters MC. The restoration of endodontically treated, single-rooted
teeth with cast or direct posts and cores: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent
2002;87:380 6.
5. Peters MC, Poort HW, Farah JW, Craig RG. Stress analysis of a tooth restored with a
postand core. J Dent Res 1983;62:760 3.
6. Ferrari M, Vicchi A, Manocci F, Mason PN. Retrospective study of the clinical performance of fiber posts. Am J Dent 2000;13(Spec No):9B13.
7. Cagidiaco MC, Radovic I, Simonetti M, Tay F, Ferrari M. Clinical performance of fiber
post restorations in endodontically treated teeth: 2-year results. Int J Prosthodont
2007;20:293 8.
8. Monticelli F, Goracci C, Ferrari M. Micromorphology of the fiber post-resin core unit:
a scanning electron microscopy evaluation. Dent Mater 2004;20:176 83.
9. Akkayan B, Gulmetz T. Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth restored
with different post systems. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:4317.
10. Guzy GE, Nicholls JI. In vitro comparison of intact endodontically treated teeth with
and without endo-post reinfocement. J Prosthet Dent 1979;42:39 44.
11. Salameh Z, Sorrentino R, Ounsi HF, et al. Effect of different all-ceramic crown
system on fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with and without glass fiber posts. J Endod 2007;
33:848 51.
12. Heydecke G, Butz F, Strub JR. Fracture strength and survival rate of endodontically
treated maxillary incisors with approximal cavities restoration with different post and
core systems: an in vitro study. J Dent 2001;29:42733.
13. Gu HX, Kern M. Fracture resistance of crowned incisors with different post systems
and luting agents. J Oral Rehabil 2006;33:918 23.

845

Basic ResearchTechnology
14. Sorrentino R, Aversa R, Ferro V, et al. Three-dimensional finite element analysis
of strain and stress distributions in endodontically treated maxillary central
incisors restored with different post, core and crown materials. Dent Mater
2007;23:98393.
15. McLean JW. Evolution of dental ceramics in the twentieth century. J Prosthet Dent
2001;85:61 6.
16. Dong JK, Luthy H, Wohlwend A, Scharer P. Heat-pressed ceramics: technology and
strength. Int J Prosthodont 1992;5:9 16.
17. Behr M, Rosentritt M, Latzel D, Kreisler T. Comparison of three types of fiber-reinforced composite molar crowns on their fracture resistance and marginal adaptation. J Dent 2001;29:18796.
18. Morgano SM, Rodrigues AH, Sabrosa CE. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth.
Dent Clin North Am 2004;48:397 416.
19. Loney RW, Kotowicz WE, McDowell GC. Three-dimensional photoelastic stress analysis of the ferrule effect in cast post and cores. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:506 12.
20. Soares CJ, Pizi ECG, Fonseca RB, Martins LRM. Influenceof root embedment material
and periodontal ligament simulation on fracture resistance tests. Braz Oral Res 2005;
19:11 6.
21. De Jager N, Pallav P, Feilzer AJ. The influence of design parameters on the FEAdetermined stress distribution in CAD-CAM produced all-ceramic dental crowns.
Dent Mater 2005;21:24251.
22. Qing H, Zhu Z, Chao Y, Zhang W. In vitro evaluation of the fracture resistance of
anterior endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fiber and zircon posts. J
Prosthet Dent 2007;97:93 8.

846

Salameh et al.

23. Hayashi M, Takahashi Y, Imatazato S, Ebisu S. Fracture resistance of pulpless teeth

restored with post-cores and crowns. Dent Mater 2006;22:477 85.
24. Plotino G, Grande NM, Bedini R, Pamrijer CH, Somma F. Flexural properties of
endodontic posts and human root dentin. Dent Mater 2007;23:1129 35.
25. Salameh Z, Sorentino R, Papacchini F, et al. Fracture resistance and failure pattern of
endodontically treated mandibular molars restored using resin composite with or
without glass fiber posts. J Endod 2006;32:7525.
26. Tan PL, Aquilino SA, Gratton DG, et al. In vitro fracture resistance of endodontically
treated central incisors with varying ferrule heights and configurations. J Prosthet
Dent 2005;93:331 6.
27. Dietschi D, Ardu S, Rossier-Gerber A, Krejci I. Adaptation of adhesive post and cores
to dentin after in vitro occlusal loading: evaluation of post material influence. J Adhes
Dent 2006;8:409 19.
28. Gu XH, Huang JP, Wang XX. An experimental study on fracture resistance of metalceramic crowned incisors with different post-core systems. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi
Xue Za Zhi 2007;42:169 72.
29. Pierrisnard L, Bohin F, Renault P, Barquins M. Corono-radicular reconstruction of
pulpless teeth: a mechanical study using finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent
2002;88:442 8.
30. Stricker EJ, Gohring TN. Influence of different posts and cores on marginal adaptation, fracture resistance, and fracture mode of composite resin crowns on human
mandibular premolars. An in vitro study. J Dent 2006;34:326 35.
31. Jin XJ. Martensitic transformation in zirconia containing ceramics and its applications. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci 2005;9:313 8.

JOE Volume 34, Number 7, July 2008