Effect of different indirect composite onlay and core materials on fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars.

Purpose To compare and evaluate the effects of different indirect composite onlay and/or core buildup materials on the fracture resistance and fracture mode of restored endodontically treated premolars.Methods Two conventional handmade indirect composite resins (SR Nexco (NC) and Ceramage (CM)) and two core buildup materials, dual-cure composite resin (MultiCore Flow (MC)), and short fiber-reinforced composite resin (EverX Posterior (EXP)), were selected. Sixty maxillary premolars were randomly divided into six groups (n=10). Group 1 included intact teeth (INT; positive control). Mesio-occluso-distal cavity preparation and endodontic treatment was performed on the remaining premolars. Group 2 was restored with polymer-reinforced zinc oxide eugenol intermediate restorative material (IRM; negative control), whereas the experimental groups (groups 3-6) were restored with core buildup material and indirect composite onlay (MC_NC, MC_CM, EXP_NC, and EXP_CM). The specimens received compressive loading using a universal testing machine, at 45° to the long axis with a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min until fracture. Fracture modes were visually analyzed. Fracture resistance was measured and statistically analyzed using two-way and one-way ANOVA (α=0.05).Results Only the type of indirect composite onlay affected the fracture resistance of the experimental groups (P=0.009). The MC_CM group showed the highest fracture resistance, which was significantly higher than that of the MC_NC group (P=0.031). No statistically significant differences were found between the INT group and other experimental groups(P>0.05). All groups had a greater incidence of restorable than unrestorable failures.Conclusions The type of indirect composite onlay affected the fracture resistance of restored endodontically treated maxillary premolars.

An Efficacy of Photobiomodulation of 850 nm on Pain Reduction in a Human Oral Capsaicin Pain Model.

Objective: The aim of this clinical trial was to evaluate the efficacy of photobiomodulation (PBM) to reduce oral pain initiated by capsaicin. Background: PBM has been used for pain reduction in oral regions; however, its clinical efficacy to alleviate burning sensations is still unknown. Methods: This clinical study was divided into two phases. There were 10 subjects in each phase. In Phase I, the burning sensation was stimulated using 0.05% in 95% ethanol capsaicin (prepared by the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Thailand) on filter paper and recorded with a 10-cm horizontal visual analog scale (VAS) every 1 min until the subject experienced no more pain. The area under the curve (AUC) of the graph between VAS and time was calculated. The washout period was 24 h. In Phase II, a crossover clinical trial was conducted in subjects who received the pain model as stated. Four interventions were included: (1) PBM before & after pain stimulation, (2) PBM before pain stimulation, (3) PBM after pain stimulation, and (4) Placebo. For PBM intervention, a single exposure of 850 nm Laser (AsGaAl; TOP 250 Soft Laser, Berkmed Medikal, distributed by Medical Innovation-MI, Istanbul, Turkey) with 0.10 cm2 spot size laser probe continuous wave at 1 W/cm2 and 30 J/cm2 for 30 sec was used. Results: In Phase I, there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.09) between the average AUC of day 1 [55.63 (23.38)] and day 2 [48.99 (27.20)]. In phase II, there was no statistical difference (p = 0.20) of the average AUC among the interventions and the placebo; group 1 [56.24 (30.11)], group 2 [45.46 (45.46)], group 3 [64.15 (32.89)], and group 4 [58.59 (30.16)]. Conclusions: The human capsaicin model was suitable for a crossover design clinical trial. The PBM used in this study did not reduce oral burning sensations from capsaicin.