Surface Topography and Pushout Bond Strength of Glass Fiber Posts with Different Surface Treatments to Root Dentin Following Cementation by Precuring and Co-Curing Methods : Short title: Surface Topography and Pushout Bond Strength of Glass Fiber Posts to Root Dentin Following Cementation.

IF 0.7 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Galen Medical Journal Pub Date : 2026-05-02 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.31661/gmj.v15i.3865
Azita Kaviani, Pardis Khoshnood, Faramarz Zakavi
{"title":"Surface Topography and Pushout Bond Strength of Glass Fiber Posts with Different Surface Treatments to Root Dentin Following Cementation by Precuring and Co-Curing Methods : Short title: Surface Topography and Pushout Bond Strength of Glass Fiber Posts to Root Dentin Following Cementation.","authors":"Azita Kaviani, Pardis Khoshnood, Faramarz Zakavi","doi":"10.31661/gmj.v15i.3865","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study assessed the surface topography and pushout bond strength (PBS) of glass fiber posts (GFPs) with different surface treatments to root dentin following cementation by precuring and co-curing methods.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this in vitro study, 80 extracted single-rooted premolars were decoronated and randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=20) for surface treatment of GFPs with 20% H2O2, Er,Cr:YSGG laser (2780 nm, 90 mJ, 4.5 W, 50 Hz, 60 seconds) and sandblasting (50 µm aluminum oxide particles, 2.8 bar pressure, 10 mm distance, 20 seconds). No surface treatment was performed in group 4. Each group was randomly divided into two subgroups (n=10) for cementation of GFPs with precuring and co-curing methods. The PBS was measured, the mode of failure was determined, and the surface topography of the posts was assessed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Data were analyzed by ANOVA, Tukey, and Dunnett tests (alpha=0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean PBS of H2O2-treated GFPs was significantly higher in co-curing than precuring method (P=0.04). No significant difference was found between the precuring and co-curing in PBS of GFPs with other surface treatments (P0.05). The mean PBS of sandblasted, laser-treated, and H2O2-treated GFPs was not significantly different in precuring method. In co-curing cementation, sandblasting significantly decreased the PBS (P=0.04) while laser and H2O2 surface treatments had no significant effect on PBS (P0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The co-curing cementation method yielded a significantly higher PBS than the precuring method in H2O2-treated GFPs. Sandblasting significantly decreased the PBS of GFPs cemented by the co-curing method.</p>","PeriodicalId":44017,"journal":{"name":"Galen Medical Journal","volume":"15 ","pages":"e3865"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13319542/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Galen Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31661/gmj.v15i.3865","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study assessed the surface topography and pushout bond strength (PBS) of glass fiber posts (GFPs) with different surface treatments to root dentin following cementation by precuring and co-curing methods.

Materials and methods: In this in vitro study, 80 extracted single-rooted premolars were decoronated and randomly assigned to 4 groups (n=20) for surface treatment of GFPs with 20% H2O2, Er,Cr:YSGG laser (2780 nm, 90 mJ, 4.5 W, 50 Hz, 60 seconds) and sandblasting (50 µm aluminum oxide particles, 2.8 bar pressure, 10 mm distance, 20 seconds). No surface treatment was performed in group 4. Each group was randomly divided into two subgroups (n=10) for cementation of GFPs with precuring and co-curing methods. The PBS was measured, the mode of failure was determined, and the surface topography of the posts was assessed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Data were analyzed by ANOVA, Tukey, and Dunnett tests (alpha=0.05).

Results: The mean PBS of H2O2-treated GFPs was significantly higher in co-curing than precuring method (P=0.04). No significant difference was found between the precuring and co-curing in PBS of GFPs with other surface treatments (P0.05). The mean PBS of sandblasted, laser-treated, and H2O2-treated GFPs was not significantly different in precuring method. In co-curing cementation, sandblasting significantly decreased the PBS (P=0.04) while laser and H2O2 surface treatments had no significant effect on PBS (P0.05).

Conclusion: The co-curing cementation method yielded a significantly higher PBS than the precuring method in H2O2-treated GFPs. Sandblasting significantly decreased the PBS of GFPs cemented by the co-curing method.

预固化和共固化固化后不同表面处理的玻璃纤维桩与牙根质的表面形貌和外推结合强度:简称:玻璃纤维桩与牙根质的表面形貌和外推结合强度。
背景:本研究评估了不同表面处理的玻璃纤维桩(gfp)在预固化和共固化方法固接后与牙根本质的表面形貌和推力结合强度(PBS)。材料与方法:将80颗提取的单根前磨牙进行体外修饰,随机分为4组(n=20),分别采用20% H2O2, Er,Cr:YSGG激光(2780 nm, 90 mJ, 4.5 W, 50 Hz, 60秒)和喷砂(50µm氧化铝颗粒,2.8 bar压力,10 mm距离,20秒)对gfp进行表面处理。第4组不进行表面处理。每组随机分为两个亚组(n=10),分别采用预固化和共固化方法固接GFPs。测量了PBS,确定了失效模式,并在扫描电镜(SEM)下评估了桩的表面形貌。数据分析采用方差分析、Tukey检验和Dunnett检验(α =0.05)。结果:共固化处理的gfp平均PBS显著高于预固化(P=0.04)。gfp的PBS预固化和共固化与其他表面处理无显著差异(P0.05)。喷砂处理、激光处理和h2o2处理的gfp的平均PBS在预处理方法上没有显著差异。在共固化胶结中,喷砂显著降低了PBS (P=0.04),而激光和H2O2表面处理对PBS无显著影响(P0.05)。结论:共固化胶结法在h2o2处理的gfp中获得的PBS明显高于预固化法。喷砂显著降低了共固化gfp的PBS。
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
Galen Medical Journal
Galen Medical Journal MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: GMJ is open access, peer-reviewed journal in English and supported by Noncommunicable Diseases (NCD) Research Center of Fasa University of Medical Sciences that publishing by Salvia Medical Sciences Ltd. GMJ will consider all types of the following scientific papers for publication: - Editorial’s choice - Original Researches - Review articles - Case reports - Case series - Letter (to editors, to authors, etc) - Short communications - Medical Idea
×
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