Adhesion of Two New Glass Fiber Post Systems Cemented with Self-Adhesive Resin Cements

Abstract

The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the adhesion strength of two new fiber post systems (FiberSite™ Post and Cytec™ Blanco Post) cemented with two different adhesive resin cements (Panavia™ SA and Maxcem™ Elite). Root canals of sixty extracted human mandibular premolars were prepared using ProTaper Universal™ rotary files (Dentsply Sirona Endodontics, York, PA, USA). The root canals were irrigated with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) during instrumentation. After root canal preparation, the canals were irrigated with 2 mL of 17% EDTA (1 min), followed by 2 mL of 5.25% (5 min) NaOCI, and 2 mL saline. The root canals were dried with paper points and divided randomly into two study groups (n = 30) according to the type of post system: Group 1, FiberSite™ Post (MegaDental, Partanna, Italy); and group 2, Cytec™ Blanco Post (Hahnenkratt, Königsbach-Stein, Germany), with one of the two adhesive resin cements: Subgroup A, Panavia™ SA Cement Plus Automix (Kuraray, Osaka, Japan); subgroup B, Maxcem™ Elite (Kerr, Orange, CA, USA). Following thermocycling, the adhesion strength was evaluated using the push-out adhesion (bond) strength test. Fractographic analysis was performed using stereomicroscope. The data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance (p = 0.05). The adhesion strength values of both the posts were significantly higher when cemented with subgroup B (Maxcem™ Elite). The highest adhesion strength value was demonstrated by group 1B (FiberSite™ post cemented with Maxcem™ Elite cement). The type of post did not have a significant impact on the bond strength values for either cement material.

Bond strength and failure mode of glass fiber posts with different surface treatments prior to silanization: An in vitro comparative study

“…Studies using self-adhesives as luting material for glass fiber posts showed similar results in all three root regions (cervical, middle, and apical). [ 30 31 32 33 ] However, this differs from the findings obtained in the present study, since a significantly higher bond strength was obtained in the apical region when the post surface was pretreated with 37% phosphoric acid and 1.23% APF, coinciding with the reports of Vildósola et al [ 34 ] and Boing et al [ 35 ] It is possible that the bond strength was better in the apical region because of root anatomy, since the glass fiber posts used in this study were conical in shape, making them better adapted to this region. In addition, the self-adhesive cement used (RelyX U200) showed, in other studies, better volume and fluidity at the apical region of root,[ 1 36 ] which favors good bonding.…”

Avaliação da resistência à fratura de dentes restaurados e tratados endodonticamente com diferentes retentores intrarradiculares

“…A escolha do tipo de restauração de um dente tratado endodonticamente é guiada pela resistência e estética e pode exigir a colocação de pinos intrarradiculares para auxiliar na retenção das restaurações (Memon et al;Palepwad & Kulkarni, 2020), logo o propósito primário de um retentor intrarradicular é reter e estabilizar a restauração coronária que apresenta extensa perda de estrutura (Goracci;Ferrari, 2011;Aleisa et al, 2012;Freitas et al, 2019;Özlek et. al., 2019), diminuindo assim os riscos de fraturas radiculares (Gonçalves et al, 2006;Wu et al, 2007;Freitas et al, 2019;Özlek et. al, 2019).…”

Fracture Strength and Failure Modes of Endodontically Treated Premolars Restored with Compact and Hollow Composite Posts Subjected to Cyclic Fatigue

“…Specifically, a lower polymerization degree can be found at the bottom of the cavity due to the decrease of light cure intensity [ 11 ]. Lately, self-adhesive resin cement characterized by a dual-cure mechanism and no dentin pre-treatment requirement has been introduced on the dental market [ 12 ]. The presence of two residual marginal ridges significantly improves long term success of post-endodontic restorations [ 13 ].…”