Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 9, 2026
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Fracture Resistance of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate- and Biodentine-Pulpotomized teeth with Different Restorative
Hajar Farhadpour1, Yasamin Ghahramani2, Mohammadhossein Jahani3
1Oral and Dental Disease Research Center, Dept. of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Background:
Preserving the radicular pulp in traumatically or mechanically exposed teeth through coronal pulpotomy (CP) is an advantageous endodontic procedure.
Purpose:
This study compared the fracture resistance (FR) of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Biodentine (BD) in pulpotomized maxillary premolars restored with different materials.
Materials And Method:
Ninety extracted maxillary premolars were divided into 9 groups (n=10). Group 1 served as intact controls. For the other groups, after access cavity preparation, half of the teeth were pulpotomized with MTA, and the others with BD. Groups 2 (MTA/unrestored) and 3 (BD/unrestored) remained unrestored. Restorations were as follows: Groups 4 (MTA/GI+Am) and 5 (BD/GI+Am) were restored with glass ionomer and amalgam; groups 6 (MTA/RMGI+ conventional com) and 7 (BD/RMGI+conventional com) with resin-modified glass-ionomer and conventional composite resin; groups 8 (MTA/bulk-fill com) and 9 (BD/bulk-fill com) with bulk-fill composite. After 24 hours, the FR test was conducted. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and the Tukey test (p Value< 0.05).
Results:
FR of control group was significantly higher than the all other groups (p> 0.05). There was no significant difference between two unrestored MTA and BD groups (2 and 3) (p= 0.62). Group 2 (MTA/unrestored) showed significantly lower FR compared to all composite restored groups (6-9) (p< 0.05), and comparable to amalgam restored groups (4 and 5). The higher FR of all the restored groups (4-9) compared to BD/unrestored group (group 3) was not significant p> 0.05). There was no significant difference between all the restored groups in terms of FR and fracture type rate (p.> 0.05).
Conclusion:
Both composite resins increased the strength of MTA-pulpotomized premolars, but this was not the case for BD. FR of amalgam restorations did not significantly differ from both composite resin restorations. However, none of the tested restorations was capable to recover the fracture strength completely.
