Effect of different adhesive systems and post surface treatments on the push-out bond strengths of fiber-reinforced post

Min-Woo Kim; Jin-Hee Ahn; Lee-Kyoung Kim; Hye-Won Shim

doi:10.4047/jkap.2016.54.3.218

Journal List > J Korean Acad Prosthodont > v.54(3) > 1034874

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim, Ahn, Kim, and Shim: Effect of different adhesive systems and post surface treatments on the push-out bond strengths of fiber-reinforced post

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2016;54(3):218-225.

Published online: 18 December 2016

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2016.54.3.218

Effect of different adhesive systems and post surface treatments on the push-out bond strengths of fiber-reinforced post

Min-Woo Kim, Jin-Hee Ahn, Lee-Kyoung Kim, Hye-Won Shim^∗

Department of Prosthodontics, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Anyang, Republic of Korea

∗Corresponding Author: Hye-Won Shim Department of Prosthodontics, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital 22, Gwanpyeong-ro 170 beon-gil, Dongan-gu, Anyang 14068, Republic of Korea +82 (0)31 380 3870: e-mail, hyewonshim@hanmail.net

Received 22 February 201616 May 2016 Accepted 17 May 2016

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the push-out bond strength of glass-fiber post cemented with different adhesive systems and surface treatments.

Materials and methods

160 tooth samples made from 48 human maxillary single-rooted teeth with similar root length were divided into 4 groups according to the adhesive system (no adhesive, Adper Single Bond 2, Clearfil SE Bond, Clearfil S3). Each group had 4 subgroups according to the post surface treatment methods (no treatment, sandblast, silane, sandblast and silane). Posts (Parapost Fiber White) were cemented with Rely X Unicem. The teeth were sectioned perpendicular to their long axis into 1-mm thick sections. The push-out tests was performed at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. The results were evaluated by 2-way ANOVA, 1-way ANOVA and multiple comparison procedures (Tukey test) (α =0.05).

Results

Tukey test showed that the adhesive system significantly influenced the push-out strength. The Clearfil SE Bond group showed the highest value. Post surface treatments showed no significant effect.

Conclusion

Bond strength of glass-fiber post cemented with self-adhesive resin cement using Clearfil SE Bond showed significantly higher values compared to other adhesive systems. (J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2016;54:218-25)

Keywords: Bond strength, Fiber-reinforced post, Push-out test, Adhesive system

REFERENCES

1.Lamichhane A., Xu C., Zhang FQ. Dental fiber-post resin base material: a review. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014. 6:60–5.

2.Pereira JR., Lins do Valle A., Ghizoni JS., Lorenzoni FC., Ramos MB., Dos Reis So′MV. Push-out bond strengths of different dental cements used to cement glass fiber posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2013. 110:134–40.

3.Seefeld F., Wenz HJ., Ludwig K., Kern M. Resistance to fracture and structural characteristics of different fiber reinforced post systems. Dent Mater. 2007. 23:265–71.

4.Choudhary S., Begum Z., Choudhary P., Tripathi S. Comparative evaluation of retention of prefabricated and conventional cast post: An in vitro study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2014. 4:87–91.

5.Duret B., Reynaud M., Duret F. New concept of coronoradicular reconstruction: the Composipost (1). Chir Dent Fr. 1990. 60:131–41.

6.Monticelli F., Osorio R., Sadek FT., Radovic I., Toledano M., Ferrari M. Surface treatments for improving bond strength to prefabricated fiber posts: a literature review. Oper Dent. 2008. 33:346–55.

7.Matinlinna JP., Ozcan M., Lassila LV., Vallittu PK. The effect of a 3-methacryloxypropyltrimethoxysilane and vinyltriiso-propoxysilane blend and tris(3-trimethoxysilylpropyl)isocyanurate on the shear bond strength of composite resin to titanium metal. Dent Mater. 2004. 20:804–13.

8.Sarkis-Onofre R., Skupien JA., Cenci MS., Moraes RR., Pereira-Cenci T. The role of resin cement on bond strength of glass-fiber posts luted into root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies. Oper Dent. 2014. 39:E31–44.

9.Sahafi A., Peutzfeldt A., Asmussen E., Gotfredsen K. Bond strength of resin cement to dentin and to surface-treated posts of titanium alloy, glass fiber, and zirconia. J Adhes Dent. 2003. 5:153–62.

10.Balbosh A., Kern M. Effect of surface treatment on retention of glass-fiber endodontic posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2006. 95:218–23.

11.Demiryürek EO., Külünk S., Saraç D., Yüksel G., Bulucu B. Effect of different surface treatments on the push-out bond strength of fiber post to root canal dentin. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009. 108:e74–80.

12.Kahnamouei MA., Mohammadi N., Navimipour EJ., Shakerifar M. Push-out bond strength of quartz fibre posts to root canal dentin using total-etch and self-adhesive resin cements. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012. 17:e337–44.

13.Das AK., Muddugangadhar BC., Amarnath GS., Garg A., Kumar U., Rao TR. Comparative evaluation of push out bond strength of a fiber post system using four different resin cements: An in-vitro study. J Int Oral Health. 2015. 7:62–7.

14.Helvacloğlu Klvanç B., Deniz Arlsu H., Uçta ll MB., Okay TC. The effect of different adhesive system applications on push-out bond strengths of glass fiber posts. J Adv Prosthodont. 2013. 5:305–11.

15.Erdemir U., Mumcu E., Topcu FT., Yildiz E., Yamanel K., Akyol M. Micro push-out bond strengths of 2 fiber post types luted using different adhesive strategies. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010. 110:534–44.

16.Erdemir U., Sar-Sancakli H., Yildiz E., Ozel S., Batur B. An in vitro comparison of different adhesive strategies on the micro push-out bond strength of a glass fiber post. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011. 16:e626–34.

17.Skupien JA., Sarkis-Onofre R., Cenci MS., Moraes RR., Pereira-Cenci T. A systematic review of factors associated with the retention of glass fiber posts. Braz Oral Res. 2015. 29:pii. S1806–83242015000100401.

18.Goracci C., Tavares AU., Fabianelli A., Monticelli F., Raffaelli O., Cardoso PC., Tay F., Ferrari M. The adhesion between fiber posts and root canal walls: comparison between microtensile and push-out bond strength measurements. Eur J Oral Sci. 2004. 112:353–61.

19.De Munck J., Vargas M., Van Landuyt K., Hikita K., Lambrechts P., Van Meerbeek B. Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater. 2004. 20:963–71.

20.Goracci C., Sadek FT., Fabianelli A., Tay FR., Ferrari M. Evaluation of the adhesion of fiber posts to intraradicular dentin. Oper Dent. 2005. 30:627–35.

21.Tay FR., Gwinnett AJ., Wei SH. The overwet phenomenon: a transmission electron microscopic study of surface moisture in the acid-conditioned, resin-dentin interface. Am J Dent. 1996. 9:161–6.

22.Foxton RM., Nakajima M., Tagami J., Miura H. Bonding of photo and dual-cure adhesives to root canal dentin. Oper Dent. 2003. 28:543–51.

23.Giannini M., Carvalho RM., Martins LR., Dias CT., Pashley DH. The influence of tubule density and area of solid dentin on bond strength of two adhesive systems to dentin. J Adhes Dent. 2001. 3:315–24.

24.Inoue S., Koshiro K., Yoshida Y., De Munck J., Nagakane K., Suzuki K., Sano H., Van Meerbeek B. Hydrolytic stability of self-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res. 2005. 84:1160–4.

25.Miguez PA., Pereira MP., Swift EJ Jr. One-year tensile bond strengths of two self-etching primers to bovine enamel. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2004. 16:243–8. discussion 249.

26.Tsuchiya S., Nikaido T., Sonoda H., Foxton RM., Tagami J. Ultrastructure of the dentin-adhesive interface after acid-base challenge. J Adhes Dent. 2004. 6:183–90.

27.Matsui N., Takagaki T., Sadr A., Ikeda M., Ichinose S., Nikaido T., Tagami J. The role of MDP in a bonding resin of a two-step self-etching adhesive system. Dent Mater J. 2015. 34:227–33.

28.Aksornmuang J., Foxton RM., Nakajima M., Tagami J. Microtensile bond strength of a dual-cure resin core material to glass and quartz fibre posts. J Dent. 2004. 32:443–50.

29.Perdigão J., Gomes G., Lee IK. The effect of silane on the bond strengths of fiber posts. Dent Mater. 2006. 22:752–8.

30.Roh H., Noh K., Woo YH., Pae A. Retentive bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite posts cemented with different surface treatments. J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2014. 52:113–20.

31.Monticelli F., Osorio R., Toledano M., Goracci C., Tay FR., Ferrari M. Improving the quality of the quartz fiber postcore bond using sodium ethoxide etching and combined silane/adhesive coupling. J Endod. 2006. 32:447–51.

32.Li R., Zhou H., Wei W., Wang C., Sun YC., Gao P. Effects of Mechanical and Chemical Pretreatments of Zirconia or Fiber Posts on Resin Cement Bonding. PLoS One. 2015. 10:e0129690.

Fig. 1.

Schematic view of tooth sample.

Fig. 2.

Push-out test.

Fig. 3.

Schematic view of push-out test.

Fig. 4.

(A) Push-out strength of post with no surface treatment, (B) Push-out strength of post treated with Monobond S, (C) Push-out strength of post treated with sandblast. (D) Push-out strength of post treated with sandblast and Monobond S.

Table 1.

Mean value and standard deviation of push-out strength

Post	Dentin	N	Mean (MPa)	SD
No treatment	No treatment	10	6.18	1.53
	SingleBond 2	10	6.60	1.84
	SE Bond	10	8.40	2.15
	S3 Bond	10	6.35	2.33
Monobond S	No treatment	10	6.28	1.35
	SingleBond 2	10	6.43	2.18
	SE Bond	10	8.41	2.65
	S3 Bond	10	6.79	2.17
Sandblast	No treatment	10	5.87	1.13
	SingleBond 2	10	6.28	1.38
	SE Bond	10	7.81	1.79
	S3 Bond	10	6.68	2.67
Sandblast & Monobond S	No treatment	10	6.44	2.70
	SingleBond 2	10	6.67	2.03
	SE Bond	10	7.14	2.37
	S3 Bond	10	6.85	2.29

TOOLS

Similar articles