Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2011 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/11449/219724 |
Resumo: | This study evaluated the effects of mechanical cycling on resin push-out bond strength to root dentin, using two strategies for fiber post cementation. Forty bovine roots were embedded in acrylic resin after root canal preparation using a custom drill of the fiber post system. The fiber posts were cemented into root canals using two different strategies (N = 20): a conventional adhesive approach using a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system combined with a conventional resin cement (ScotchBond Multi Purpose Plus + RelyX ARC), or a simplified adhesive approach using a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX U100). The core was built up with composite resin and half of the specimens from each cementation strategy were submitted to mechanical cycling (45 degree angle; 37°C; 88 N; 4 Hz; 700,000 cycles). Each specimen was cross-sectioned and the disk specimens were pushed-out. The means from every group (n = 10) were statistically analyzed using a two-way ANOVA and a Tukey test (P = 0.05). The cementation strategy affected the push-out results (P < 0.001), while mechanical cycling did not (P = 0.3716). The simplified approach (a self-adhesive resin cement) had better bond performance despite the conditioning. The self-adhesive resin cement appears to be a good option for post cementation. Further trials are needed to confirm these results. |
id |
UNSP_45aa4a8ae2efd1f3340efd7ffbcb7560 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/219724 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cyclingThis study evaluated the effects of mechanical cycling on resin push-out bond strength to root dentin, using two strategies for fiber post cementation. Forty bovine roots were embedded in acrylic resin after root canal preparation using a custom drill of the fiber post system. The fiber posts were cemented into root canals using two different strategies (N = 20): a conventional adhesive approach using a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system combined with a conventional resin cement (ScotchBond Multi Purpose Plus + RelyX ARC), or a simplified adhesive approach using a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX U100). The core was built up with composite resin and half of the specimens from each cementation strategy were submitted to mechanical cycling (45 degree angle; 37°C; 88 N; 4 Hz; 700,000 cycles). Each specimen was cross-sectioned and the disk specimens were pushed-out. The means from every group (n = 10) were statistically analyzed using a two-way ANOVA and a Tukey test (P = 0.05). The cementation strategy affected the push-out results (P < 0.001), while mechanical cycling did not (P = 0.3716). The simplified approach (a self-adhesive resin cement) had better bond performance despite the conditioning. The self-adhesive resin cement appears to be a good option for post cementation. Further trials are needed to confirm these results.Paulo Sao State University (UNESP), Sao Jose dos CamposFederal University of Santa Maria, Santa MariaDivision of Prosthodontics Department of Oral Science, Alma Mater Studiorum University of BolognaPaulo Sao State University (UNESP), Sao Jose dos CamposUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Federal University of Santa MariaUniversity of BolognaAmaral, Marina [UNESP]Rippe, Marilia Pivetta [UNESP]Bergoli, Cesar Dalmolin [UNESP]Monaco, CarloValandro, Luiz Felipe2022-04-28T18:57:13Z2022-04-28T18:57:13Z2011-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleGeneral Dentistry, v. 59, n. 5, 2011.0363-6771http://hdl.handle.net/11449/2197242-s2.0-80053346975Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengGeneral Dentistryinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-04-28T18:57:13Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/219724Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T23:35:15.232485Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling |
title |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling |
spellingShingle |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling Amaral, Marina [UNESP] |
title_short |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling |
title_full |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling |
title_fullStr |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling |
title_full_unstemmed |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling |
title_sort |
Multi-step adhesive cementation versus one-step adhesive cementation: Push-out bond strength between fiber post and root dentin before and after mechanical cycling |
author |
Amaral, Marina [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Amaral, Marina [UNESP] Rippe, Marilia Pivetta [UNESP] Bergoli, Cesar Dalmolin [UNESP] Monaco, Carlo Valandro, Luiz Felipe |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Rippe, Marilia Pivetta [UNESP] Bergoli, Cesar Dalmolin [UNESP] Monaco, Carlo Valandro, Luiz Felipe |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) Federal University of Santa Maria University of Bologna |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Amaral, Marina [UNESP] Rippe, Marilia Pivetta [UNESP] Bergoli, Cesar Dalmolin [UNESP] Monaco, Carlo Valandro, Luiz Felipe |
description |
This study evaluated the effects of mechanical cycling on resin push-out bond strength to root dentin, using two strategies for fiber post cementation. Forty bovine roots were embedded in acrylic resin after root canal preparation using a custom drill of the fiber post system. The fiber posts were cemented into root canals using two different strategies (N = 20): a conventional adhesive approach using a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system combined with a conventional resin cement (ScotchBond Multi Purpose Plus + RelyX ARC), or a simplified adhesive approach using a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX U100). The core was built up with composite resin and half of the specimens from each cementation strategy were submitted to mechanical cycling (45 degree angle; 37°C; 88 N; 4 Hz; 700,000 cycles). Each specimen was cross-sectioned and the disk specimens were pushed-out. The means from every group (n = 10) were statistically analyzed using a two-way ANOVA and a Tukey test (P = 0.05). The cementation strategy affected the push-out results (P < 0.001), while mechanical cycling did not (P = 0.3716). The simplified approach (a self-adhesive resin cement) had better bond performance despite the conditioning. The self-adhesive resin cement appears to be a good option for post cementation. Further trials are needed to confirm these results. |
publishDate |
2011 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2011-09-01 2022-04-28T18:57:13Z 2022-04-28T18:57:13Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
General Dentistry, v. 59, n. 5, 2011. 0363-6771 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/219724 2-s2.0-80053346975 |
identifier_str_mv |
General Dentistry, v. 59, n. 5, 2011. 0363-6771 2-s2.0-80053346975 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/219724 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
General Dentistry |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Scopus reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808129533368336384 |