Journal of endodontics · 2026
Biomechanical Effect of Different Biodentine Placement Levels in Regenerative Endodontic Procedures: A Finite Element Analysis and Fracture Resistance Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sutam Nithinun, Wichai Wassana, Thianwiboon Mongkol, Jantarat Jeeraphat
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The placement level of hydraulic calcium silicate materials during regenerative endodontic procedures (REPs) may affect biomechanical performance of immature permanent teeth. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different Biodentine placement levels on biomechanical performance of immature permanent teeth treated with REPs using three-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA) validated by fracture resistance testing.
METHODS: Standardized immature maxillary premolars (n = 10/group) were assigned to 5 groups: intact teeth (negative control), access preparation without restoration (positive control), and Biodentine placed above, at, or below the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), followed by adhesive restoration. FEA was performed to evaluate stress distribution under occlusal loading. Fracture resistance and fracture patterns were assessed by compressive loading to failure. Data were analyzed in groups using one-way analysis of variance.
RESULTS: Buccal cervical region exhibited highest stress concentration in all FEA models and corresponded to predominant fracture site during mechanical testing. Fracture resistance was the highest in intact teeth (1893.23 ± 63.30 N), followed by Biodentine placed below CEJ (1785.06 ± 69.11 N), at CEJ (1426.87 ± 96.09 N), above CEJ (946.61 ± 131.20 N), and positive control (724.48 ± 89.29 N). Biodentine placement below CEJ showed fracture resistance comparable to intact teeth and fewer nonrestorable fractures (50%) than placement above the CEJ (70%) and positive control (80%).
CONCLUSIONS: Biodentine placement level significantly influenced biomechanical performance of immature teeth treated with REPs. Placement below CEJ provided the most favorable biomechanical performance by reducing cervical stress concentration, maintaining fracture resistance comparable to intact teeth, and decreasing nonrestorable fractures.
METHODS: Standardized immature maxillary premolars (n = 10/group) were assigned to 5 groups: intact teeth (negative control), access preparation without restoration (positive control), and Biodentine placed above, at, or below the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), followed by adhesive restoration. FEA was performed to evaluate stress distribution under occlusal loading. Fracture resistance and fracture patterns were assessed by compressive loading to failure. Data were analyzed in groups using one-way analysis of variance.
RESULTS: Buccal cervical region exhibited highest stress concentration in all FEA models and corresponded to predominant fracture site during mechanical testing. Fracture resistance was the highest in intact teeth (1893.23 ± 63.30 N), followed by Biodentine placed below CEJ (1785.06 ± 69.11 N), at CEJ (1426.87 ± 96.09 N), above CEJ (946.61 ± 131.20 N), and positive control (724.48 ± 89.29 N). Biodentine placement below CEJ showed fracture resistance comparable to intact teeth and fewer nonrestorable fractures (50%) than placement above the CEJ (70%) and positive control (80%).
CONCLUSIONS: Biodentine placement level significantly influenced biomechanical performance of immature teeth treated with REPs. Placement below CEJ provided the most favorable biomechanical performance by reducing cervical stress concentration, maintaining fracture resistance comparable to intact teeth, and decreasing nonrestorable fractures.