The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Pamato, Saulo
Data de Publicação: 2023
Outros Autores: Kuga, Milton Carlos, Ricci, Weber Adad, Oliveira, Eliane Cristina Gulin de, Trevisan, Tamara Carolina, Só, Marcus Vinicius Reis, Moraes, João Carlos Silos, Pereira, Jefferson Ricardo, Fahl Júnior, Newton
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10183/274763
Resumo: Recent formulations of resin-based composites have incorporated different combinations of materials. However, the mechanical and bonding behavior of these materials with intraradicular posts are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of light-cure and dual-cure resin composite posts on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated teeth. Materials and Methods: Ninety extracted human upper canines were selected and randomly divided into nine groups (n=10): (G1) endodontically treated teeth without endodontic posts; (G2) glass-fiber post cemented with glass-ionomer cement; (G3) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Rebilda DC); (G4) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Cosmecore); (G5) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Bis-Core); (G6) endodontic post by light-cure composite resin; (G7) glass-fiber post customized with flowable composite resin; (G8) glass-fiber post cemented with light-cure composite resin; (G9) glass-fiber post cemented with self-adhesive resin cement. After the post insertion, all specimens were subjected to mechanical (250,000 cycles) and thermocycling (6000 cycles, 5 °C/55 °C) and immediate loading at 45 degrees in a universal testing machine until fracture. The data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and multiple comparisons using the Fisher LSD Method (p < 0 05). Results: The mean failure loads (±SD) for the groups ranged from 100.7 ± 22.6 N to 221.9 ± 48.9 N. The G1 group (without endodontic posts) had a higher fracture strength than all experimental groups (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Within the limitations, the light- and dual-cure post technique did not present lower fracture resistance values as compared to the conventional glass-fiber post.
id UFRGS-2_df009e02ed17f53114c2249f5daad9ca
oai_identifier_str oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/274763
network_acronym_str UFRGS-2
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
repository_id_str
spelling Pamato, SauloKuga, Milton CarlosRicci, Weber AdadOliveira, Eliane Cristina Gulin deTrevisan, Tamara CarolinaSó, Marcus Vinicius ReisMoraes, João Carlos SilosPereira, Jefferson RicardoFahl Júnior, Newton2024-04-16T06:36:12Z20232073-4360http://hdl.handle.net/10183/274763001199902Recent formulations of resin-based composites have incorporated different combinations of materials. However, the mechanical and bonding behavior of these materials with intraradicular posts are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of light-cure and dual-cure resin composite posts on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated teeth. Materials and Methods: Ninety extracted human upper canines were selected and randomly divided into nine groups (n=10): (G1) endodontically treated teeth without endodontic posts; (G2) glass-fiber post cemented with glass-ionomer cement; (G3) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Rebilda DC); (G4) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Cosmecore); (G5) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Bis-Core); (G6) endodontic post by light-cure composite resin; (G7) glass-fiber post customized with flowable composite resin; (G8) glass-fiber post cemented with light-cure composite resin; (G9) glass-fiber post cemented with self-adhesive resin cement. After the post insertion, all specimens were subjected to mechanical (250,000 cycles) and thermocycling (6000 cycles, 5 °C/55 °C) and immediate loading at 45 degrees in a universal testing machine until fracture. The data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and multiple comparisons using the Fisher LSD Method (p < 0 05). Results: The mean failure loads (±SD) for the groups ranged from 100.7 ± 22.6 N to 221.9 ± 48.9 N. The G1 group (without endodontic posts) had a higher fracture strength than all experimental groups (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Within the limitations, the light- and dual-cure post technique did not present lower fracture resistance values as compared to the conventional glass-fiber post.application/pdfengPolymers [recurso eletrônico]. Basel. Vol. 15, n.1 (Jan. 2023), 236, 10 p.Dente não vitalResistência à flexãoResinas compostasEndodontically treated teethFiber postFracture resistancePost-endodontic restorationResin materialThe influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teethEstrangeiroinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGSinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSTEXT001199902.pdf.txt001199902.pdf.txtExtracted Texttext/plain38272http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/274763/2/001199902.pdf.txt31022ad3a140405395b380dfdddfe520MD52ORIGINAL001199902.pdfTexto completo (inglês)application/pdf1738248http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/274763/1/001199902.pdfe5f9cd6f638deb8e10454c6d5b25cd18MD5110183/2747632024-04-17 06:35:38.837659oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/274763Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttps://lume.ufrgs.br/oai/requestopendoar:2024-04-17T09:35:38Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth
title The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth
spellingShingle The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth
Pamato, Saulo
Dente não vital
Resistência à flexão
Resinas compostas
Endodontically treated teeth
Fiber post
Fracture resistance
Post-endodontic restoration
Resin material
title_short The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth
title_full The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth
title_fullStr The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth
title_full_unstemmed The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth
title_sort The influence on fracture resistance of different composite resins and prefabricated posts to restore endodontically treated teeth
author Pamato, Saulo
author_facet Pamato, Saulo
Kuga, Milton Carlos
Ricci, Weber Adad
Oliveira, Eliane Cristina Gulin de
Trevisan, Tamara Carolina
Só, Marcus Vinicius Reis
Moraes, João Carlos Silos
Pereira, Jefferson Ricardo
Fahl Júnior, Newton
author_role author
author2 Kuga, Milton Carlos
Ricci, Weber Adad
Oliveira, Eliane Cristina Gulin de
Trevisan, Tamara Carolina
Só, Marcus Vinicius Reis
Moraes, João Carlos Silos
Pereira, Jefferson Ricardo
Fahl Júnior, Newton
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pamato, Saulo
Kuga, Milton Carlos
Ricci, Weber Adad
Oliveira, Eliane Cristina Gulin de
Trevisan, Tamara Carolina
Só, Marcus Vinicius Reis
Moraes, João Carlos Silos
Pereira, Jefferson Ricardo
Fahl Júnior, Newton
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Dente não vital
Resistência à flexão
Resinas compostas
topic Dente não vital
Resistência à flexão
Resinas compostas
Endodontically treated teeth
Fiber post
Fracture resistance
Post-endodontic restoration
Resin material
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv Endodontically treated teeth
Fiber post
Fracture resistance
Post-endodontic restoration
Resin material
description Recent formulations of resin-based composites have incorporated different combinations of materials. However, the mechanical and bonding behavior of these materials with intraradicular posts are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of light-cure and dual-cure resin composite posts on the fracture resistance of endodontically-treated teeth. Materials and Methods: Ninety extracted human upper canines were selected and randomly divided into nine groups (n=10): (G1) endodontically treated teeth without endodontic posts; (G2) glass-fiber post cemented with glass-ionomer cement; (G3) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Rebilda DC); (G4) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Cosmecore); (G5) endodontic post by dual-cure composite resin (Bis-Core); (G6) endodontic post by light-cure composite resin; (G7) glass-fiber post customized with flowable composite resin; (G8) glass-fiber post cemented with light-cure composite resin; (G9) glass-fiber post cemented with self-adhesive resin cement. After the post insertion, all specimens were subjected to mechanical (250,000 cycles) and thermocycling (6000 cycles, 5 °C/55 °C) and immediate loading at 45 degrees in a universal testing machine until fracture. The data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and multiple comparisons using the Fisher LSD Method (p < 0 05). Results: The mean failure loads (±SD) for the groups ranged from 100.7 ± 22.6 N to 221.9 ± 48.9 N. The G1 group (without endodontic posts) had a higher fracture strength than all experimental groups (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Within the limitations, the light- and dual-cure post technique did not present lower fracture resistance values as compared to the conventional glass-fiber post.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2023
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2024-04-16T06:36:12Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv Estrangeiro
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10183/274763
dc.identifier.issn.pt_BR.fl_str_mv 2073-4360
dc.identifier.nrb.pt_BR.fl_str_mv 001199902
identifier_str_mv 2073-4360
001199902
url http://hdl.handle.net/10183/274763
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartof.pt_BR.fl_str_mv Polymers [recurso eletrônico]. Basel. Vol. 15, n.1 (Jan. 2023), 236, 10 p.
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
instacron:UFRGS
instname_str Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
instacron_str UFRGS
institution UFRGS
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
collection Repositório Institucional da UFRGS
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/274763/2/001199902.pdf.txt
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/274763/1/001199902.pdf
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv 31022ad3a140405395b380dfdddfe520
e5f9cd6f638deb8e10454c6d5b25cd18
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1801225115934916608