1Post Graduate Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Genesis Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Ferozepur, Punjab, India
3Professor & Head, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Genesis Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Ferozepur, Punjab, India
4Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Dasmesh Institute of Research and Dental Sciences, Faridkot, Punjab, India
5Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Genesis Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Ferozepur, Punjab, India
6Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Adesh Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Bathinda, India
*Corresponding Author: Dr. Bharti Kataria, Post Graduate Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Genesis Institute of Dental Sciences and Research, Ferozepur, Punjab, India
Online published on 15 September, 2022.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate fracture resistance and remaining dentin thickness of teeth with traditional endodontic cavity (TEC), conservative endodontic cavity (CEC), and ultra conservative “Ninja” endodontic cavity (NEC) access.
48 freshly extracted intact human maxillary first molars were randomly assigned to four groups: control (intact teeth), TEC, CEC, NEC groups (n=12).The percentage of volume of coronal enamel and dentin removed for each type of tooth were calculated and the specimens were then subjected to fracture in the Universal Testing machine.
The mean fracture load for TEC was significantly lower than the one for the CEC, NEC, and control groups for all types of teeth (P <.05).There was a significant difference in volume of tooth removal between intact and TEC, CEC, NEC (p < 0.05).
Ultraconservative “ninja” endodontic cavity access did not increase the fracture strength of te eth when compared with the ones prepared with CEC.
Traditional access cavity, Conservative access cavity, Ninja access cavity, Fracture Resistance, Remaining Dentin Thickness
