• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Resistance to horizontal forces of dowel and amalgam-core restorations: a comparative study.

作者信息

Gordon M, Metzger Z

出版信息

J Oral Rehabil. 1987 Jul;14(4):337-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1987.tb00727.x.

DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2842.1987.tb00727.x
PMID:3305840
Abstract

Four designs of amalgam-core anchorage were compared in a laboratory study for the inability to withstand the horizontal component of occlusal force. Amalgam cores were constructed for extracted teeth with either composite resin-cemented Dentatus dowels, or with Para-post or Flexi-post dowels cemented with phosphate cement. All the posts were of comparable length and diameter. These anchorage designs were compared with each other and to a self-threading (TMS) pin-retained amalgam core, by application of horizontal force and recording forces causing failure. Flexi-post-retained amalgam cores failed at a mean force of 36.5 (+/- 8.5) kg while Dentatus-retained and Para-post-retained cores failed at 41.7 (+/- 8.0) kg and 46.6 (+/- 11.4) kg, respectively. TMS-retained cores resisted forces up to a mean force of 53.5 (+/- 4.5) kg. Patterns of failure varied widely among these groups. Composite resin-cemented Dentatus dowels were retained in the tooth in nine out of ten samples, while none of the ten Flexi-post dowels and only one of the ten Para-post dowels did so. Tooth fracture on failure occurred in seven out of ten Flexi-post-retained cores, while only three out of ten of the Para-post-retained cores and none of the Dentatus dowel-retained cores presented this unrepairable type of failure. Possible reasons for these differences are discussed.

摘要

相似文献

1
Resistance to horizontal forces of dowel and amalgam-core restorations: a comparative study.
J Oral Rehabil. 1987 Jul;14(4):337-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1987.tb00727.x.
2
Improving the seal of amalgam cores with cemented dowels: a comparative in vitro radioactive tracer study.
J Endod. 2001 Apr;27(4):288-91. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200104000-00015.
3
The use of reinforced composite resin cement as compensation for reduced post length.使用增强复合树脂水门汀作为缩短桩长度的补偿。
J Prosthet Dent. 2001 Sep;86(3):304-8. doi: 10.1067/mpr.2001.114759.
4
Fatigue resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with three dowel-and-core systems.三种桩核系统修复的根管治疗牙的抗疲劳性
J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Jan;93(1):45-50. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.09.026.
5
Retention of three endodontic posts cemented with five dental cements.
J Prosthet Dent. 1998 May;79(5):520-5. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70172-6.
6
Fatigue life of three core materials under simulated chewing conditions.
J Prosthet Dent. 1992 Oct;68(4):584-90. doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(92)90370-p.
7
Comparison of two luting agents used for the retention of cast dowel and cores.用于铸造桩核固位的两种粘结剂的比较。
J Prosthodont. 2005 Sep;14(3):164-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2005.00349.x.
8
Retention of cast crowns cemented to amalgam and composite resin cores.
J Prosthet Dent. 1981 May;45(5):525-8. doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(81)90040-8.
9
A comparative study of the bond strengths of amalgam and alloy-glass ionomer cores.汞合金与合金-玻璃离子桩核粘结强度的对比研究。
J Oral Rehabil. 1989 May;16(3):301-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1989.tb01345.x.
10
A study of the fracture resistance of nyyar cores of three restorative materials.三种修复材料的镍铬合金核抗折性研究。
Oper Dent. 2008 May-Jun;33(3):305-11. doi: 10.2341/07-90.