Abdul Salam Saridatun Nur, Banerjee Avijit, Mannocci Francesco, Pilecki Peter, Watson Timothy F
Guy's Hospital, King's College London Dental Institute, London.
Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2006 Sep;14(3):98-104.
The aims of this in-vitro investigation were to compare the fracture resistance and the failure modes of endodontically treated teeth restored with glass fibre-reinforced posts with those of teeth restored with titanium-alloy posts. A total of 60 single-rooted human mandibular premolars were endodontically treated. The teeth were divided into two experimental and one control group. Post spaces 9mm long were prepared in the roots of the experimental groups in which glass fibre-reinforced posts (Group A) and titanium-alloy posts (Group B) were cemented. In the control group (Group C), no post was inserted. The specimens were stored in normal saline for a period of three weeks before being intermittently loaded at an angle of 30 degrees degrees to the long axis of the tooth at a frequency of two loads of 40N per second. Log-rank test used for the overall analysis revealed that there was no significant difference of fracture resistance between teeth restored with glass fibre-reinforced posts (Group A) and titanium-alloy posts (Group B). The survival of the control group was found to be significantly inferior to that of the experimental groups. There was no significant difference in the number of failures between the two experimental groups. There was significantly more core and post failure for the glass fibre-reinforced posts, root and core failure for the titanium-alloy posts and core failure for the control group. The results suggest that post failures are more frequent in teeth restored with quartz fibre posts and root fractures are more frequent in teeth restored with titanium posts.
本体外研究的目的是比较用玻璃纤维桩修复的根管治疗牙与用钛合金桩修复的牙的抗折性和失败模式。总共60颗单根人类下颌前磨牙接受了根管治疗。这些牙齿被分为两个实验组和一个对照组。在实验组的牙根中制备9毫米长的桩道，其中分别粘结玻璃纤维桩（A组）和钛合金桩（B组）。在对照组（C组）中，不插入桩。标本在生理盐水中保存三周，然后以与牙长轴成30度角、每秒施加两次40N载荷的频率进行间歇加载。用于总体分析的对数秩检验显示，用玻璃纤维桩修复的牙（A组）和用钛合金桩修复的牙（B组）之间在抗折性上没有显著差异。发现对照组的存活率明显低于实验组。两个实验组之间在失败数量上没有显著差异。玻璃纤维桩的核与桩失败明显更多，钛合金桩的根与核失败更多，对照组则是核失败更多。结果表明，用石英纤维桩修复的牙桩失败更频繁，用钛桩修复的牙根折更频繁。
