We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Fracture resistance of teeth restored with different post systems using new-generation adhesives.
AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the fracture strength of three post systems cemented with a dual cure composite resin luting cement by using different adhesive systems.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this study 63 extracted anterior teeth with single roots were endodontically prepared and filled. Teeth were randomly assigned to one of three post systems placed into the prepared canals: Group I - titanium posts (n=21) (Filpost); Group II - glass fiber posts (n=21) (Mirafit White); and Group III zirconia posts (n=21) (CosmoPost). Each group was again randomly divided into three subgroups according to the bonding materials used [Single Bond (n=7), Clearfil SE Bond (n=7), and Prompt L Pop (n=7)]. A dual cured resin cement (Rely X ARC) was used for bonding the posts into the root canals. Standard cores were made by a composite resin (Clearfil Photocore) using core build-ups. The samples were tested in the compression test machine for 1 mm/min and fracture resistance of the teeth were recorded. The data was analyzed by using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan's New Multiple Range Tests. A significance level of p<.05 was used for all comparisons.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in fracture resistance between the post systems (p<0.05) and the interaction of adhesive resins and post systems (p<0.05). Mirafit White was more resistant to fracture than other groups; Filpost showed the least resistance to fracture. CosmoPost post system bonded with Single Bond recorded the lowest fracture resistance (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Endodontically treated anterior teeth restored with glass fiber posts exhibited higher failure loads than teeth restored with zirconia and titanium posts. Self-etching adhesives are better alternatives to etch-and-rinse adhesive systems for luting post systems.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Under the condition of this study, glass fiber posts are preferable to restore endodontically treated anterior teeth.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this study 63 extracted anterior teeth with single roots were endodontically prepared and filled. Teeth were randomly assigned to one of three post systems placed into the prepared canals: Group I - titanium posts (n=21) (Filpost); Group II - glass fiber posts (n=21) (Mirafit White); and Group III zirconia posts (n=21) (CosmoPost). Each group was again randomly divided into three subgroups according to the bonding materials used [Single Bond (n=7), Clearfil SE Bond (n=7), and Prompt L Pop (n=7)]. A dual cured resin cement (Rely X ARC) was used for bonding the posts into the root canals. Standard cores were made by a composite resin (Clearfil Photocore) using core build-ups. The samples were tested in the compression test machine for 1 mm/min and fracture resistance of the teeth were recorded. The data was analyzed by using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan's New Multiple Range Tests. A significance level of p<.05 was used for all comparisons.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in fracture resistance between the post systems (p<0.05) and the interaction of adhesive resins and post systems (p<0.05). Mirafit White was more resistant to fracture than other groups; Filpost showed the least resistance to fracture. CosmoPost post system bonded with Single Bond recorded the lowest fracture resistance (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Endodontically treated anterior teeth restored with glass fiber posts exhibited higher failure loads than teeth restored with zirconia and titanium posts. Self-etching adhesives are better alternatives to etch-and-rinse adhesive systems for luting post systems.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Under the condition of this study, glass fiber posts are preferable to restore endodontically treated anterior teeth.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app