Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2026
Accessing the Cytotoxicity and Cell Response to Biomaterials
Published on: July 8, 2021
The Effect of Intraorifice Barrier Materials on the Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Teeth: A Systematic
Sevilay Karahan1, Zeynep Buket Dağ2, Emel Uzunoğlu Özyürek2
1Hacettepe University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Biostatistics, Ankara, Turkey.
Objective:
To compare intraorifice barrier materials for reinforcing endodontically treated teeth using a network meta-analysis of in vitro studies.
Methods:
EBSCO, PubMed, Virtual Health Library, Ovid, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched to December 2025. Eligible studies compared at least 2 of the following: alkasite restorative material, composite resin, fiber-reinforced composite (FRC), resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), flowable composite, Biodentine, mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), and control. The primary outcome was fracture resistance (Newtons). The analysis was conducted in MetaInsight v6.4.0 (Complex Reviews Synthesis Unit, NIHR (Evidence Synthesis Group, University of Glasgow), Glasgow, United Kingdom) using its Bayesian option; results are reported as 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Treatment hierarchy was summarized with SUCRA. Small-study effects were assessed with funnel plot and Egger's test.
Results:
Twenty studies met the eligibility criteria; 14 contributed to the network meta-analysis. Versus control, fracture resistance increased with alkasite restorative material (MD 406.37; 95% CrI 133.4-679.8), FRC (MD 370.83; 95% CrI 168.82- 574.27), composite resin (MD 360.62; 95% CrI 181.92-555.15), RMGIC (MD 310.82; 95% CrI 180.93-449.62), flowable composite (MD 285.5; 95% CrI 107.79-468.35) and Biodentine (MD 230.83; 95% CrI 66.55-401.34). MTA showed no clear benefit (MD 60.41; 95% CrI -123.08- 242.82). SUCRA ranking favored alkasite restorative material, followed by FRC, composite resin, RMGIC, flowable composite resin, Biodentine, MTA, and control. Node-split analyses indicated some local inconsistency across a subset of contrasts (2 of 28 contrasts; minimum P = .003). Funnel-plot inspection and Egger's test did not suggest small-study effects (P = .664).
Conclusions:
Use of an intraorifice barrier generally improves the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. Materials traditionally categorized as restorative materials (alkasite, resin composites, FRC, and RMGIC) tended to rank higher than calcium silicate-based barriers (Biodentine, MTA) in vitro. Standardized testing protocols are needed to optimize material selection.
More Related Videos
03:07Scanning Electron Microscopic Evaluation of Surface Defects of Remover Retreatment File After Single and Multiple Uses
Published on: October 11, 2024
07:42Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
