Postgraduate student, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo (USP), Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
Professor, Department of Comprehensive Care, School of Dental Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.
J Prosthet Dent. 2020 Dec;124(6):738.e1-738.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.04.021. Epub 2020 Jul 18.
An intraradicular retainer formed by multiple independent glass fiber filaments was developed aiming to allow better adaptation in flattened root canals; however, the performance of the new posts is unclear.
The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the bond strength (BS) and adhesive interface quality achieved in flattened root canals restored with conventional glass fiber posts (CFPs) and multifilament glass fiber posts (MFPs).
The distal roots of mandibular molars with long oval root canals were endodontically treated, and the obturation material was removed and assigned to 2 groups (n=11) according to the type of retainer used: CFP (WhitePostDC#0.5; FGM) or MFP (CometTail#4; Synca). The posts were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement. The specimens were sectioned (2 slices per third). The most cervical slice in each third was used to evaluate the BS, while the adhesive interface in the apical slices was analyzed by scanning electron microscopy. BS data were analyzed by using a multilevel generalized linear model, and adhesive interface SEM data were analyzed by using a multilevel ordinal logistic regression model (α=.05).
Multilevel regression showed a statistically significant difference for the "type of retainer" factor (P=.001; CFP 2.61 ±1.30>MFP 1.59 ±1.54). No statistically significant differences were found for the "root thirds" factor (P=.346) or for the interaction of both factors (P=.114). The failure pattern was predominantly mixed or adhesive for CFP and adhesive to dentin for MFP. A better adaptation of the restorative material was observed in the cervical third for CFP and in the apical third for MFP (P<.001).
MFP resulted in lower BS values than CFP, with a higher prevalence of adhesive failures to dentin and better adaptation of the adhesive interface in the apical third.
为了使根管在扁平根管中更好地适应,开发了一种由多个独立玻璃纤维丝形成的根管内固位体;然而,新桩的性能尚不清楚。
本体外研究旨在比较使用常规玻璃纤维桩(CFP)和多纤维玻璃纤维桩(MFPs)修复扁平根管时的粘结强度(BS)和粘结界面质量。
将具有长椭圆形根管的下颌磨牙的远中根进行根管内治疗,并根据使用的固位体类型将根管填充物去除并分为 2 组(n=11):CFP(WhitePostDC#0.5;FGM)或 MFP(CometTail#4;Synca)。使用自粘结树脂水泥粘结桩。将标本切成(每三分之一 2 片)。每三分之一的最颈切片用于评估 BS,而根尖切片中的粘结界面则通过扫描电子显微镜进行分析。使用多级广义线性模型分析 BS 数据,使用多级有序逻辑回归模型(α=.05)分析 SEM 数据。
多级回归显示“固位体类型”因素具有统计学显著差异(P=.001;CFP 2.61±1.30>MFP 1.59±1.54)。“根三分之一”因素(P=.346)或两个因素的相互作用均无统计学显著差异(P=.114)。CFP 的失效模式主要为混合或粘结性,而 MFP 则为粘结性至牙本质。在 CFP 中,修复材料在颈三分之一处观察到更好的适应性,而在 MFP 中,在根尖三分之一处观察到更好的适应性(P<.001)。
与 CFP 相比,MFP 的 BS 值较低,牙本质粘结性失效的发生率较高,根尖三分之一处的粘结界面适应性较好。