Influence of Access Cavity Preparation and Remaining Tooth Substance on Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth


      • The influence of different access cavities and/or loss of tooth walls was evaluated.
      • Teeth with traditional, conservative, and truss access had similar fracture strength.
      • Intact teeth had higher fracture strength than the teeth in all of the test groups.
      • The loss of both mesial and distal ridges reduced tooth strength significantly.
      • The loss of 2 walls reduced the fracture strength of teeth more than access cavities.



      The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of access cavity preparation and the remaining tooth substance on the fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth.


      One hundred sound mandibular first and second molar teeth were selected and divided into 1 control and 9 test groups (n = 10/group) as follows: control group, intact teeth; group 1, teeth prepared with traditional endodontic access cavity (TEC); group 2, teeth prepared with conservative endodontic access cavity (CEC); group 3, teeth prepared with truss endodontic access cavity (TREC); group 4, TEC + 3 residual walls; group 5, CEC + 3 residual walls; group 6, TREC + 3 residual walls; group 7, TEC + 2 residual walls; group 8, CEC + 2 residual walls; and group 9, TREC + 2 residual walls. After access cavity preparation, all test teeth were endodontically treated and restored. The specimens were then loaded to fracture in a universal loading machine (Triaxial Tester T400 Digital; Controls srl, Cernusco, Italy), and fracture values were recorded in newtons. The data were analyzed with 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc analysis for multiple comparisons (P < .05).


      Intact teeth were more resistant to fracture than the teeth in all the test groups. No statistically significant differences were found between the 3 tested access cavities (P > .05). Significant differences were observed between the different number of residual walls (P < .05).


      TRECs do not increase the fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth in comparison with CECs and TECs. Moreover, the loss of mesial and distal ridges reduced the fracture strength of teeth significantly.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Endodontics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Reeh E.S.
        • Messer H.H.
        • Douglas W.H.
        Reduction in tooth stiffness as a result of endodontic and restorative procedures.
        J Endod. 1989; 15: 512-516
        • Carter J.M.
        • Sorensen S.E.
        • Johnson R.R.
        • et al.
        Punch shear testing of extracted vital and endodontically treated teeth.
        J Biomech. 1983; 16: 841-848
        • Testori T.
        • Badino M.
        • Castagnola M.
        Vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth: a clinical survey of 36 cases.
        J Endod. 1993; 19: 87-91
        • Tamse A.
        • Fuss Z.
        • Lustig J.
        • et al.
        An evaluation of endodontically treated vertically fractured teeth.
        J Endod. 1999; 7: 506-508
        • Ferrari M.
        • Mason P.N.
        • Goracci C.
        • et al.
        Collagen degradation in endodontically treated teeth after clinical function.
        J Dent Res. 2004; 83: 414-419
        • Dietschi D.
        • Duc O.
        • Krejci I.
        • et al.
        Biomechanical considerations for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review of the literature–Part 1. Composition and micro- and macrostructure alterations.
        Quintessence Int. 2007; 38: 733-743
        • Soares C.J.
        • Santana F.R.
        • Silva N.R.
        • et al.
        Influence of the endodontic treatment on mechanical properties of root dentin.
        J Endod. 2007; 33: 603-606
        • Soares P.V.
        • Santos-Filho P.C.
        • Martins L.R.
        • et al.
        Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part I: fracture resistance and fracture mode.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 99: 30-37
        • Soares P.V.
        • Santos-Filho P.C.
        • Gomide H.A.
        • et al.
        Influence of restorative technique on the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated maxillary premolars. Part II: strain measurement and stress distribution.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 99: 114-122
        • Sedgley C.M.
        • Messer H.H.
        Are endodontically treated teeth more brittle?.
        J Endod. 1992; 18: 332-335
        • Murdoch-Kinch C.A.
        • McLean M.E.
        Minimally invasive dentistry.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 2003; 134: 87-95
        • Boveda C.
        • Kishen A.
        Contracted endodontic cavities: the foundation for less invasive alternatives in the management of apical periodontitis.
        Endod Topics. 2015; 33: 169-186
        • Clark D.
        • Khademi J.
        Modern molar endodontic access and directed dentin conservation.
        Dent Clin North Am. 2010; 54: 249-273
        • Clark D.
        • Khademi J.
        Case studies in modern molar endodontic access and directed dentin conservation.
        Dent Clin North Am. 2010; 54: 275-289
        • Krishan R.
        • Paquè F.
        • Ossareh A.
        • et al.
        Impact of conservative endodontic cavity on root canal instrumentation efficacy and resistance to fracture assessed in incisors, premolars and molars.
        J Endod. 2014; 40: 1160-1166
        • Plotino G.
        • Grande N.M.
        • Isufi A.
        • et al.
        Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth with different access cavity designs.
        J Endod. 2017; 43: 995-1000
        • Buchanan L.S.
        Cutting endodontic access cavities - for long term outcomes.
        Roots Int Ed. 2015; 6: 12-16
        • Neelakantan P.
        • Khan K.
        • Hei Ng G.P.
        • et al.
        Does the orifice-directed dentin conservation access design debride pulp chamber and mesial root canal systems of mandibular molars similar to a traditional access design.
        J Endod. 2018; 44: 274-279
        • Ibrahim A.M.
        • Richards L.C.
        • Berekally T.L.
        Effect of remaining tooth structure on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated maxillary premolars: An in vitro study.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 115: 290-295
        • Sorrentino R.
        • Monticelli F.
        • Goracci C.
        • et al.
        Effect of post-retained composite restorations and amount of coronal residual structure on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth.
        Am J Dent. 2007; 20: 269-274
        • Pedullà E.
        • Genovese C.
        • Campagna E.
        • et al.
        Decontamination efficacy of photon initiated photoacoustic streaming (PIPS) of irrigants using low-energy laser settings: an ex vivo study.
        Int Endod J. 2012; 45: 865-870
        • Ingle J.I.
        Endodontic cavity preparation.
        in: Ingle J. Tamber J. Endodontics. 3rd ed. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia1985: 102-167
        • Patel S.
        • Rhodes J.
        A practical guide to endodontic access cavity preparation in molar teeth.
        Br Dent J. 2007; 203: 133-140
        • Nothdurft F.P.
        • Seidel E.
        • Gebhart F.
        • et al.
        The fracture behavior of premolar teeth with class II cavities restored by both direct composite restorations and endodontic post systems.
        J Dent. 2008; 36: 444-449
        • Akbarian G.
        • Ameri H.
        • Chasteen J.E.
        • et al.
        Fracture resistance of premolar teeth restored with silorane-based or dimethacrylate-based composite resins.
        J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014; 26: 200-207
      1. DentSply Sirona. Reciproc Blue R25. Available at: Flagship/Italy/News/RECIPROC%20blue.pdf. Accessed July 31, 2017.

        • Lang H.
        • Korkmaz Y.
        • Schneider K.
        • et al.
        Impact of endodontic treatments on the rigidity of the root.
        J Dent Res. 2006; 85: 364-368
        • Bassir M.M.
        • Labibzadeh A.
        • Mollaverdi F.
        The effect of amount of lost tooth structure and restorative technique on fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars.
        J Conserv Dent. 2013; 16: 413-417
        • Douglas W.H.
        Methods to improve fracture resistance teeth.
        in: Vanherle G. Smith D.C. International Symposium on Posterior Composite Resin Dental Restorative Materials. Peter Szulc Publishing, Utrecht, Netherlands1985: 433-441
        • Morin D.
        • Douglas W.H.
        • Cross M.
        • et al.
        Biophysical stress analysis of restored teeth: experimental strain measurement.
        Dent Mater. 1988; 4: 41-48
        • Panitvisai P.
        • Messer H.H.
        Cuspal deflection in molars in relation to endodontic and restorative procedures.
        J Endod. 1995; 21: 57-61
        • Ikram O.H.
        • Patel S.
        • Sauro S.
        • et al.
        Micro-computed tomography of tooth tissue volume changes following endodontic procedures and post space preparation.
        Int Endod J. 2009; 42: 1071-1076
        • Belograd M.
        The Genious 2 is coming.
        (Available at:)
        • Özyürek T.
        • Ülker Ö.
        • Demiryürek E.Ö.
        • et al.
        The effects of endodontic access cavity preparation design on the fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth: traditional versus conservative preparation.
        J Endod. 2018; 44: 800-805
        • Moore B.
        • Verdelis K.
        • Kishen A.
        • et al.
        Impacts of contracted endodontic cavities on instrumentation efficacy and biomechanical responses in maxillary molars.
        J Endod. 2016; 42: 1779-1783
        • Rover G.
        • Belladonna F.G.
        • Bortoluzzi E.A.
        • et al.
        Influence of access cavity design on root canal detection, instrumentation efficacy, and fracture resistance assessed in maxillary molars.
        J Endod. 2017; 43: 1657-1662