The aim of this study was to determine the average dentin wall thickness (DWT) of the maxillary central incisor (MCI) required for performing finite element analysis (FEA) models of root development. A total of 137 intraoral periapical radiographs of MCI in children aged 7 to 11 years were examined and then classified into 5 groups according to root development stages, which included 1/2 of root development (S1), 3/4 of root development (S2), more than 3/4 of root development (S3), complete development with wide-open apex (S4) and complete development with closed apex (S5). DWT was measured at three reference (horizontal) lines: at a distance of 1 mm from the apex (M), 4 mm from the apex (L) and at the cervical line (K). The distal dentin wall thickness (M1, L1, and K1), the pulp thickness (M2, L2, and K2), the mesial dentin wall thickness (M3, L3, and K3), and the apex thickness (N) were measured using the diagnostic software Soredex Scanora 5.1.2.4. Statistical analysis compared the values of the parameters K, L, and M between developmental stages (multivariate ANOVA) and the linear correlations between the parameters (Pearson's correlation analysis). All analyses were performed at significance level α = 0.05. There were statistically significant differences between the developmental stages for parameters L and M, while no significant differences were found for parameter K. Most of the correlations between the parameters were statistically significant, with the values of the Pearson correlation coefficient R > 0.6 considered practically significant. All parameters on the same reference line for distal and mesial dentin wall thickness and for pulp thickness correlated well with each other (R = 0.46 – 0.68), but there was no statistically significant correlation with total root thickness on the same reference line (parameters K, L, or M), except for parameter K3 (R = 0.42). Despite the limitations of this study, the mean values of the selected parameters for the 5 groups of developmental stages of the maxillary central incisor could be used to model dentin wall thickness using finite element analysis.

Background and Objective: Immature maxillary incisors (IMIs) are especially susceptible to failure due to their thin dentinal walls and compromised structural integrity following endodontic treatment. This study aims to evaluate the stress distribution within the root dentin after various post-endodontic treatments. Materials and methods: A personalized finite element analysis model of IMI was created using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) data. Based on data from the literature, five stages of root development were reconstructed: half root development (S1), three-quarter development (S2), more than three-quarter development (S3), fully developed root with open apex (S4), and fully developed root with closed apex (S5). Six experimental groups were analyzed: GC Fiber Post (PS1); RelyX Post (PS2); metal post Unimetric 1.0 (PS3); everStick Post (PS4); positive control group with only the gutta-percha filling (PC), and intact maxillary incisor as negative control group (NC). The resulting equivalent stresses were evaluated using the Hencky–von Mises (HMH) strength theory. Results: The mean HMH stress within the root dentin was statistically significantly higher at the cervical level in all stages, except in stage S1 and models PS2 and PS3 in stage S2, where it was significantly higher at the apical level (p < 0.001 for all models, except stage S3 [PC model p < 0.005; NC model p < 0.008]). The PS4 model showed the lowest stress values at the cervical level in stages S1, S2, and S3 (55.19 MPa, 58.78 MPa, 58.84 MPa) and the PS1 model in stages S4 and S5 (57.48 MPa, 58.81 MPa). At the apical level, model PS3 showed the lowest stress values in stage S1 (69.60 MPa), model PS1 in stages S2, S3, and S5 (35.99 MPa, 44.30 MPa, 12.51 MPa) and model PC in stage S4 (17.85 MPa). Conclusions: The results showed that the greatest stress in an immature maxillary central incisor occurred at the cervical level, except during the early stage of root development. Post placement did not reduce root dentin stress.