Assessment of biomechanical behavior of immature non-vital incisors with various treatment modalities by means of three-dimensional quasi–static finite element analysis

• Published in: Scientific reports 2023-10, Vol.13 (1), p.17491-17491, Article 17491
• Main Authors: Hassouneh, Layla, Matoug-Elwerfelli, Manal, Al-Omari, Taher, Setzer, Frank C., Nagendrababu, Venkateshbabu
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 639/301; 692/308; 692/700; Biomechanics; Composite materials; Finite element analysis; Finite element method; Humanities and Social Sciences; Incisors; Mastication; Maxilla; multidisciplinary; Science; Science (multidisciplinary); Shear stress; Teeth
• ISSN: 2045-2322; 2045-2322
• DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-44609-2

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the stress distribution and risk of fracture of a non-vital immature maxillary central incisor subjected to various clinical procedures using finite element analysis (FEA). A three-dimensional model of an immature central incisor was developed, from which six main models were designed: untreated immature tooth (C), standard apical plug (AP), resin composite (RC), glass-fibre post (GFP), regeneration procedure (RET), and regeneration with induced root maturation (RRM). Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) or Biodentine ® were used as an apical or coronal plug. All models simulated masticatory forces in a quasi–static approach with an oblique force of 240 Newton at a 120° to the longitudinal tooth axis. The maximum principal stress, maximum shear stress, risk of fracture, and the strengthening percentage were evaluated. The mean maximum principal stress values were highest in model C [90.3 MPa (SD = 4.4)] and lowest in the GFP models treated with either MTA and Biodentine ® ; 64.1 (SD = 1.7) and 64.0 (SD = 1.6) MPa, respectively. Regarding the shear stress values, the dentine tooth structure in model C [14.4 MPa (SD = 0.8)] and GFP models [15.4 MPa (SD = 1.1)] reported significantly higher maximum shear stress values compared to other tested models (p  0.05). No significant differences between MTA and Biodentine ® regarding maximum principal stress and maximum shear stress values for each tested model (p > 0.05). A maximum strain value of 4.07E−03 and maximum displacement magnitude of 0.128 mm was recorded in model C. In terms of strengthening percentage, the GFP models were associated with the highest increase (22%). The use of a GFP improved the biomechanical performance and resulted in a lower risk of fracture of a non-vital immature maxillary central incisor in a FEA model.