Comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study

Aim: To investigate push-out bond strength (PBS) of fiber post to radicular dentin after using different cementation techniques. Material and methods: Sixty single-rooted premolars were disinfected and cleaned by mechanical instrumentation. S1, S2, and SX were used for canal shaping and finishing of...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Abdulaziz AlHelal, Khalid AlShehri, Abdullah AlOmairy, Ibrahim AlQahtani, Huda I Tulbah, Amal Al-Qahtani, Mustafa Naseem, Fahim Vohra, Tariq Abduljabbar
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	SAGE Publishing 2021
Materias:	Biotechnology TP248.13-248.65
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/fbdf03c052c241ad958e5f55f9564194
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:fbdf03c052c241ad958e5f55f9564194
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:fbdf03c052c241ad958e5f55f95641942021-12-01T02:03:46ZComparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study2280-800010.1177/22808000211058867https://doaj.org/article/fbdf03c052c241ad958e5f55f95641942021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1177/22808000211058867https://doaj.org/toc/2280-8000Aim: To investigate push-out bond strength (PBS) of fiber post to radicular dentin after using different cementation techniques. Material and methods: Sixty single-rooted premolars were disinfected and cleaned by mechanical instrumentation. S1, S2, and SX were used for canal shaping and finishing of the canal was carried out using F1 and F2. This was followed by constant irrigation and smear layer removal using 17%EDTA. The canal was dried filled with gutta-percha and canal space was prepared using a peso reamer. Based on cementation techniques, samples were randomly allocated into six groups. Group 1: One-step Monoblock MC; Group 2: One-step, Monoblock MC-NA (no adhesive) GFP; Group 3: One-step, RX-MC-Monoblock; Group 4: Two-step, RX-MC; Group 5: Two-step, RX-FZ; and Group 6: Two-step RX-FZ-custom post. All specimens were mounted in polyvinyl pipes using acrylic resin up to cement enamel junction. All specimens were mounted in a universal testing machine subjected to push-out forces at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. Five samples from each group were sputter-coated with 6 nm gold thickness for 300 s at 250 mA. The coated specimens were assessed under the scanning electron microscope (SEM). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey Kramer multiple comparisons tests were performed to compare means among groups maintaining the level of significance at ( p < 0.001). Results: The highest PBS was displayed in RX-MC-Monoblock (199.020 ± 21.432 MPa). Whereas, lowest PBS was found in Monoblock MC-NA (no adhesive)-GFP (76.440 ± 9.468 MPa). Among one-step groups, RX-MC Monoblock exhibited the highest PBS (199.020 ± 21.432 MPa) comparable to one-step Monoblock MC (134.28 ± 19.37 MPa) ( p > 0.05). Similarly, among two-steps groups, two-step RX-MC demonstrated significantly higher PBS values than two-step RX-FZ (143.340 ± 23.68 MPa) and RX-FZ-custom post (86.90 ± 7.41 MPa) ( p < 0.05). Conclusion: One-step RX-MC-Monoblock technique using self-adhesive cement and core foundation composite resin material multicore flow when cured simultaneously exhibited the highest bond integrity of post retention compared to other cementation technique.Abdulaziz AlHelalKhalid AlShehriAbdullah AlOmairyIbrahim AlQahtaniHuda I TulbahAmal Al-QahtaniMustafa NaseemFahim VohraTariq AbduljabbarSAGE PublishingarticleBiotechnologyTP248.13-248.65ENJournal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials, Vol 19 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Biotechnology TP248.13-248.65
spellingShingle	Biotechnology TP248.13-248.65 Abdulaziz AlHelal Khalid AlShehri Abdullah AlOmairy Ibrahim AlQahtani Huda I Tulbah Amal Al-Qahtani Mustafa Naseem Fahim Vohra Tariq Abduljabbar Comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study
description	Aim: To investigate push-out bond strength (PBS) of fiber post to radicular dentin after using different cementation techniques. Material and methods: Sixty single-rooted premolars were disinfected and cleaned by mechanical instrumentation. S1, S2, and SX were used for canal shaping and finishing of the canal was carried out using F1 and F2. This was followed by constant irrigation and smear layer removal using 17%EDTA. The canal was dried filled with gutta-percha and canal space was prepared using a peso reamer. Based on cementation techniques, samples were randomly allocated into six groups. Group 1: One-step Monoblock MC; Group 2: One-step, Monoblock MC-NA (no adhesive) GFP; Group 3: One-step, RX-MC-Monoblock; Group 4: Two-step, RX-MC; Group 5: Two-step, RX-FZ; and Group 6: Two-step RX-FZ-custom post. All specimens were mounted in polyvinyl pipes using acrylic resin up to cement enamel junction. All specimens were mounted in a universal testing machine subjected to push-out forces at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. Five samples from each group were sputter-coated with 6 nm gold thickness for 300 s at 250 mA. The coated specimens were assessed under the scanning electron microscope (SEM). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey Kramer multiple comparisons tests were performed to compare means among groups maintaining the level of significance at ( p < 0.001). Results: The highest PBS was displayed in RX-MC-Monoblock (199.020 ± 21.432 MPa). Whereas, lowest PBS was found in Monoblock MC-NA (no adhesive)-GFP (76.440 ± 9.468 MPa). Among one-step groups, RX-MC Monoblock exhibited the highest PBS (199.020 ± 21.432 MPa) comparable to one-step Monoblock MC (134.28 ± 19.37 MPa) ( p > 0.05). Similarly, among two-steps groups, two-step RX-MC demonstrated significantly higher PBS values than two-step RX-FZ (143.340 ± 23.68 MPa) and RX-FZ-custom post (86.90 ± 7.41 MPa) ( p < 0.05). Conclusion: One-step RX-MC-Monoblock technique using self-adhesive cement and core foundation composite resin material multicore flow when cured simultaneously exhibited the highest bond integrity of post retention compared to other cementation technique.
format	article
author	Abdulaziz AlHelal Khalid AlShehri Abdullah AlOmairy Ibrahim AlQahtani Huda I Tulbah Amal Al-Qahtani Mustafa Naseem Fahim Vohra Tariq Abduljabbar
author_facet	Abdulaziz AlHelal Khalid AlShehri Abdullah AlOmairy Ibrahim AlQahtani Huda I Tulbah Amal Al-Qahtani Mustafa Naseem Fahim Vohra Tariq Abduljabbar
author_sort	Abdulaziz AlHelal
title	Comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study
title_short	Comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study
title_full	Comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study
title_fullStr	Comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study
title_full_unstemmed	Comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study
title_sort	comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: in vitro study
publisher	SAGE Publishing
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/fbdf03c052c241ad958e5f55f9564194
work_keys_str_mv	AT abdulazizalhelal comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy AT khalidalshehri comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy AT abdullahalomairy comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy AT ibrahimalqahtani comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy AT hudaitulbah comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy AT amalalqahtani comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy AT mustafanaseem comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy AT fahimvohra comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy AT tariqabduljabbar comparisonofadhesivebondstrengthamongfiberreinforcedpostandcorewithdifferentcementationtechniquesinvitrostudy
_version_	1718405939458998272

Comparison of adhesive bond strength among fiber reinforced post and core with different cementation techniques: In vitro study

Ejemplares similares