Krishnarayan Prerna P, Gehlot Paras M
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, JSS Dental College and Hospital, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Sri Shivarathreeshwara Nagar, Mysuru, Karnataka, India.
J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2022 Apr 8;12(2):199-209. doi: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_249_21. eCollection 2022 Mar-Apr.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the time needed to remove two types of glass fiber posts cemented with two different cements and removed with two different techniques and to evaluate the fracture strength of teeth after post removal.
Root canal treatment was completed in 80 extracted single-rooted premolars and the teeth were decoronated. Following canal preparation, the roots were coated with polysiloxane impression material and embedded in acrylic resin cubes. The specimens were randomly divided into eight experimental groups ( = 10) based on the type of fiber post inserted: Reforpost (R) or Contec Blanco (C); luting cement: Multilink-N/self-etch (M) or G-Cem/self-adhesive (G); technique of removal: Peeso reamer (P); or ultrasonic (U). The posts were removed with respective technique under magnification and the time (in seconds) of post removal was determined. Following post removal, the fracture strength of the specimens was determined using a universal testing machine. The mode of failure was also determined. Data were analyzed by three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), one-way ANOVA, Tukey's test, test, and correlation. Chi-square analysis was performed to compare the failure mode. Statistical significance was set at 0.05.
The post and cement types had an influence in post removal time ( 0.05). There was no role of post or cement types on the fracture strength of teeth after post removal with either technique ( 0.05). A weak negative correlation was found between the post removal time and fracture resistance for both Peeso reamer ( = -0.373) and ultrasonic ( = -0.177) techniques. Both techniques of post removal produced a majority of favorable failures ( 0.05).
The type of post and luting cement plays a significant role in ease of post removal by Peeso reamer or ultrasonic technique. Post-removal technique had no effect on the fracture strength of teeth. Parallel serrated fiber post luted with self-etch resin cements was difficult to remove as compared with parallel smooth surface post luted with self-etch or self-adhesive resin cement.
本研究的目的是评估用两种不同的粘结剂粘结并采用两种不同技术取出的两种类型玻璃纤维桩的取出时间，并评估桩取出后牙齿的断裂强度。
对80颗拔除的单根前磨牙完成根管治疗并去除牙冠。根管预备后，将牙根用聚硅氧烷印模材料包被并嵌入丙烯酸树脂块中。根据插入的纤维桩类型，将标本随机分为8个实验组（每组n = 10）：Reforpost（R）或Contec Blanco（C）；粘结剂：Multilink - N/自酸蚀（M）或G - Cem/自粘结（G）；取出技术：Peeso扩孔钻（P）或超声（U）。在放大条件下用相应技术取出桩，并确定桩取出的时间（以秒为单位）。桩取出后，使用万能试验机测定标本的断裂强度。还确定了失效模式。数据通过三因素方差分析（ANOVA）、单因素ANOVA、Tukey检验、卡方检验和相关性分析进行分析。进行卡方分析以比较失效模式。设定统计学显著性为P < 0.05。
桩和粘结剂类型对桩取出时间有影响（P < 0.05）。两种技术取出桩后，桩或粘结剂类型对牙齿的断裂强度均无影响（P > 0.05）。对于Peeso扩孔钻（r = -0.373）和超声（r = -0.177）技术，桩取出时间与抗断裂性之间均发现弱负相关。两种桩取出技术均产生了大多数有利的失效情况（P < 0.05）。
桩和粘结剂的类型对使用Peeso扩孔钻或超声技术取出桩的难易程度有显著影响。桩取出技术对牙齿的断裂强度没有影响。与用自酸蚀或自粘结树脂粘结剂粘结的平行光滑表面桩相比，用自酸蚀树脂粘结剂粘结的平行锯齿状纤维桩难以取出。
