Department of Surgery, Medicine, Dentistry and Morphological Sciences with Transplant Surgery, Oncology and Regenerative Medicine Relevance (CHIMOMO), University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Largo del Pozzo, 71, 41124, Modena, Italy.
PhD Program in Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Odontology. 2024 Jan;112(1):158-168. doi: 10.1007/s10266-023-00820-1. Epub 2023 May 12.
Detachment is the major cause of failure of endodontic fibre posts. Hollow posts have been recently introduced to overcome such issue. The primary aim of this pilot study was to compare the push-out bond strength of hollow posts and traditional solid posts. Eight round-shaped single-canal premolars extracted for periodontal reason were selected as sample and equally randomized into two groups: (i) traditional solid fibre posts-TECH21xop and ii) hollow fibre posts-TECHOLE. A dual-curing self-adhesive cement (new TECHCEM) was used for posts placement. Six horizontal sections-two from each portion of the root (coronal, middle and apical)-were obtained from each sample root, yielding a total of 24 sections for each group. Push-out test was performed on the sections and bond strength values were compared between groups and within each group. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) fractographical analysis was conducted on each section. Additional SEM and EDX analyses were performed on new samples of both posts, to assess fibres density and distribution, and the chemical composition of the fibres and the matrix. Hollow posts showed a significantly higher push-out bond strength (6.36 ± 1.22 MPa) than solid posts (3.64 ± 1.62 MPa). Among the three root portions of the same group, there was no significant difference in bond strength. In both groups, the most frequent type of fracture was a mixed adhesive failure with the cement covering 0 to 50% of the post perimeter. Hollow post fibres appear more similar in size and have a more homogeneous distribution, compared to solid posts. The two post types also have different chemical compositions.
分离是根管纤维桩失败的主要原因。为了解决这个问题，最近引入了空心桩。本初步研究的主要目的是比较空心桩和传统实心桩的推出粘结强度。从牙周原因拔出的 8 颗圆形单根管前磨牙被选为样本，并平均随机分为两组：(i)传统实心纤维桩-TECH21xop 和(ii)空心纤维桩-TECHOLE。使用双固化自粘结水泥（新型 TECHCEM）进行桩的放置。从每个样本根的根部（冠部、中部和根尖）的两个部分各获得 6 个水平部分，每组共获得 24 个部分。对这些部分进行推出测试，并比较组间和组内的粘结强度值。对每个部分进行扫描电子显微镜（SEM）断口分析。对两种新型的纤维桩进行了额外的 SEM 和 EDX 分析，以评估纤维密度和分布，以及纤维和基质的化学成分。空心桩的推出粘结强度（6.36±1.22 MPa）明显高于实心桩（3.64±1.62 MPa）。在同一组的三个根部部分中，粘结强度没有显著差异。在两组中，最常见的断裂类型是混合性粘结失败，水泥覆盖桩周长的 0%至 50%。与实心桩相比，空心桩的纤维在尺寸上更相似，分布更均匀。两种桩类型的化学成分也不同。
