Evaluation of the push-out bond strength of fiber posts in canals treated with conventional or ultrasonic preparation protocols.

Q3 Medicine
General dentistry Pub Date : 2026-07-01
Lorena de Mello Alcântara Garrido, Marco Antônio Húngaro Duarte, Milena Perraro Martins, Índia Olinto de Azevedo Queiroz, Ana Grasiela Limoeiro, Clovis Monteiro Bramante
{"title":"Evaluation of the push-out bond strength of fiber posts in canals treated with conventional or ultrasonic preparation protocols.","authors":"Lorena de Mello Alcântara Garrido, Marco Antônio Húngaro Duarte, Milena Perraro Martins, Índia Olinto de Azevedo Queiroz, Ana Grasiela Limoeiro, Clovis Monteiro Bramante","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This in vitro study aimed to compare the effects of conventional and ultrasonic root canal preparation on the adhesion of glass fiber posts to root canal dentin. A total of 20 human maxillary central incisors were instrumented and then filled with gutta percha and sealant using the lateral condensation technique. The teeth were randomly divided into 2 equal groups (n = 10), gutta percha was removed, and canals were prepared using a different protocol for each group: in the conventional group, a Gates-Glidden drill, a Largo drill, and post bur kit were used; in the ultrasonic group, ultrasonic tips were operated in endo mode. Microcomputed tomography was used to confirm complete removal of the filling material, and fiber posts were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement. The apical ends of the roots were discarded, and the remaining portions were transversely sectioned into 3 segments, each 1.5 mm thick. The sections underwent push-out testing to determine bond strength, and the adhesion defects were examined with scanning electron microscopy and stereomicroscopy to determine the failure mode. Data normality was assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, followed by analysis of variance with Tukey test for group comparisons and chi-square tests to evaluate any associations regarding failure mode. A 5% significance level was applied. Tukey tests revealed that the conventional group exhibited statistically significant lower push-out bond strengths than the ultrasonic preparation groups across all thirds; no statistically significant differences were noted among the cervical, middle, and apical thirds within the same group. There were no statistically significant differences in failure modes between the preparation groups, and adhesive failure was the most prevalent mode. The ultrasonic method effectively removed gutta percha from canals and enhanced the bond strength of fiber posts.</p>","PeriodicalId":12571,"journal":{"name":"General dentistry","volume":"74 4","pages":"34-38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"General dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This in vitro study aimed to compare the effects of conventional and ultrasonic root canal preparation on the adhesion of glass fiber posts to root canal dentin. A total of 20 human maxillary central incisors were instrumented and then filled with gutta percha and sealant using the lateral condensation technique. The teeth were randomly divided into 2 equal groups (n = 10), gutta percha was removed, and canals were prepared using a different protocol for each group: in the conventional group, a Gates-Glidden drill, a Largo drill, and post bur kit were used; in the ultrasonic group, ultrasonic tips were operated in endo mode. Microcomputed tomography was used to confirm complete removal of the filling material, and fiber posts were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement. The apical ends of the roots were discarded, and the remaining portions were transversely sectioned into 3 segments, each 1.5 mm thick. The sections underwent push-out testing to determine bond strength, and the adhesion defects were examined with scanning electron microscopy and stereomicroscopy to determine the failure mode. Data normality was assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, followed by analysis of variance with Tukey test for group comparisons and chi-square tests to evaluate any associations regarding failure mode. A 5% significance level was applied. Tukey tests revealed that the conventional group exhibited statistically significant lower push-out bond strengths than the ultrasonic preparation groups across all thirds; no statistically significant differences were noted among the cervical, middle, and apical thirds within the same group. There were no statistically significant differences in failure modes between the preparation groups, and adhesive failure was the most prevalent mode. The ultrasonic method effectively removed gutta percha from canals and enhanced the bond strength of fiber posts.

评价常规或超声处理的根管内纤维桩的推出粘结强度。
本实验旨在比较常规根管预备与超声根管预备对玻璃纤维桩与根管牙本质黏附的影响。对20例上颌中切牙进行固定,并采用侧边凝结技术填充聚胶和密封胶。将牙随机分为2组(n = 10),拔除古胶,每组采用不同的方案制备根管:常规组使用Gates-Glidden钻、Largo钻和牙后包;超声组采用内多模式操作超声针尖。显微计算机断层扫描确认填充材料完全去除,纤维桩用自粘树脂水泥胶结。根的根尖端丢弃,其余部分横切成3段,每段1.5 mm厚。通过推出测试确定粘接强度,并通过扫描电镜和体视显微镜检查粘接缺陷以确定破坏模式。使用Kolmogorov-Smirnov检验评估数据的正态性,随后使用Tukey检验进行组间比较的方差分析,并使用卡方检验来评估与失效模式有关的任何关联。采用5%的显著性水平。Tukey测试显示,在所有三分之一的范围内,常规组的推出键强度明显低于超声制备组;同一组内颈、中、根尖三分之一间无统计学差异。两组间的失效模式无统计学差异,粘结失效是最常见的失效模式。超声法能有效去除根管中的胶状物,提高纤维桩的粘结强度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
General dentistry
General dentistry Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
134
期刊介绍: General Dentistry is the premier peer-reviewed journal of the Academy of General Dentistry (AGD). Published bi-monthly, General Dentistry presents research and clinical findings to support the full range of procedures that general dentists perform on a regular basis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书