Bond strength of glass fiber posts cemented with bulk-fill flowable composite resin

IF 1.68 Q2 Dentistry
Victor da Mota Martins, Camila Ferreira Silva, Lorena Mendes Almeida, Marcella Silva de Paula, Murilo de Sousa Menezes, Paulo Cesar Freitas Santos-Filho
{"title":"Bond strength of glass fiber posts cemented with bulk-fill flowable composite resin","authors":"Victor da Mota Martins,&nbsp;Camila Ferreira Silva,&nbsp;Lorena Mendes Almeida,&nbsp;Marcella Silva de Paula,&nbsp;Murilo de Sousa Menezes,&nbsp;Paulo Cesar Freitas Santos-Filho","doi":"10.1186/s40563-019-0119-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study evaluated the adhesive bond strength of glass fiber posts cemented with bulk-fill flowable resin in endodontically treated teeth, and the results were compared with those of glass fiber posts cemented with resin cement. Forty bovine incisor roots were selected and randomly divided into 2 groups (n?=?20). The external surfaces of the roots were coated with a molding material. The canals were prepared, and then the fiber posts (Whitepost no. 2, FGM) were cemented with either resin cement (Allcem, FGM) (n?=?20) or bulk-fill flowable resin (Opus Bulk Fill, FGM) (n?=?20). Ten roots (n?=?10) of each material were subjected to push-out and pull-out tests (EMIC DL 2000, Brazil) under compressive and tensile loading, respectively; a 50?N load cell and a constant crosshead speed of 0.5?mm/min was used for both tests. The testing data were analyzed using multifactorial analyses of variance two-way ANOVA and the Tukey test (α?=?0.05). Two skilled operators determined the failure modes of the samples using a stereomicroscope at 40× magnification with a 2.5D analysis. For push-out bond strength, there were no statistically significant differences between the root thirds in the bulk-fill flowable resin group and those in the resin cement group (p?=?0.536). However, there were statistically significant differences (p?&lt;?0.001) among the root thirds within the same group. For pull-out bond strength, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups (p?=?0.739). Therefore, the bulk-fill flowable resin exhibited similar results to those of the resin cement from the same manufacturer in terms of the cementation of glass fiber posts, which suggests that bulk-fill flowable resin is a suitable alternative material for cementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":464,"journal":{"name":"Applied Adhesion Science","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6800,"publicationDate":"2019-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s40563-019-0119-6","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Adhesion Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40563-019-0119-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

This study evaluated the adhesive bond strength of glass fiber posts cemented with bulk-fill flowable resin in endodontically treated teeth, and the results were compared with those of glass fiber posts cemented with resin cement. Forty bovine incisor roots were selected and randomly divided into 2 groups (n?=?20). The external surfaces of the roots were coated with a molding material. The canals were prepared, and then the fiber posts (Whitepost no. 2, FGM) were cemented with either resin cement (Allcem, FGM) (n?=?20) or bulk-fill flowable resin (Opus Bulk Fill, FGM) (n?=?20). Ten roots (n?=?10) of each material were subjected to push-out and pull-out tests (EMIC DL 2000, Brazil) under compressive and tensile loading, respectively; a 50?N load cell and a constant crosshead speed of 0.5?mm/min was used for both tests. The testing data were analyzed using multifactorial analyses of variance two-way ANOVA and the Tukey test (α?=?0.05). Two skilled operators determined the failure modes of the samples using a stereomicroscope at 40× magnification with a 2.5D analysis. For push-out bond strength, there were no statistically significant differences between the root thirds in the bulk-fill flowable resin group and those in the resin cement group (p?=?0.536). However, there were statistically significant differences (p?<?0.001) among the root thirds within the same group. For pull-out bond strength, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups (p?=?0.739). Therefore, the bulk-fill flowable resin exhibited similar results to those of the resin cement from the same manufacturer in terms of the cementation of glass fiber posts, which suggests that bulk-fill flowable resin is a suitable alternative material for cementation.

大块填充可流动复合树脂胶结玻璃纤维桩的粘结强度
本研究评价了填充型流动树脂固化玻璃纤维桩在根管治疗牙体中的粘接强度,并与树脂水泥固化玻璃纤维桩进行了比较。选取40只牛切牙根,随机分为2组(n = 20)。根的外表面涂上一层成型材料。预备好根管,然后将纤维桩(Whitepost no.;2, FGM)用树脂水泥(Allcem, FGM) (n?=?20)或散装填充可流动树脂(Opus散装填充,FGM) (n?=?20)进行胶结。每种材料的10根(n?=?10)分别在压缩和拉伸载荷下进行推出和拔出试验(EMIC DL 2000,巴西);一个50吗?N称重传感器和恒定的十字速度为0.5?两项试验均采用Mm /min。检验资料采用多因素方差分析、双因素方差分析和Tukey检验(α?=?0.05)。两名熟练的操作员使用40倍放大的体视显微镜和2.5D分析来确定样品的失效模式。在推出粘结强度方面,散装填充可流动树脂组与树脂水泥组三分之一根间的差异无统计学意义(p = 0.536)。然而,在同一组内,根三分之一之间存在统计学显著差异(p <?0.001)。拔出粘结强度组间差异无统计学意义(p = 0.739)。因此,散装填充可流动树脂与同一厂家的树脂水泥在玻璃纤维桩的胶结方面表现出相似的结果,这表明散装填充可流动树脂是一种合适的胶结替代材料。
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
Applied Adhesion Science
Applied Adhesion Science Dentistry-Dentistry (miscellaneous)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Applied Adhesion Science focuses on practical applications of adhesives, with special emphasis in fields such as oil industry, aerospace and biomedicine. Topics related to the phenomena of adhesion and the application of adhesive materials are welcome, especially in biomedical areas such as adhesive dentistry. Both theoretical and experimental works are considered for publication. Applied Adhesion Science is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. The journal''s open access policy offers a fast publication workflow whilst maintaining rigorous peer review process.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信