FARKLI POST SİSTEMLERİNİN TUTUCULUĞUNDA YAPIŞTIRMA SİMANLARININ ETKİSİNİN İNCELENMESİ

Year 2020, Volume: 30 Issue: 2, 267 - 273, 15.04.2020

Cenk Burak Yılmaz Nuran Yanıkoglu

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.596849

Abstract

Amaç:
Bu çalışma, farklı post sistemlerinin (döküm post, hazır seramik post)
tutuculuğu üzerine üç farklı simanın (çinko fosfat, cam iyonomer, resin siman)
etkisini incelemek ve  karşılaştırmak
amacıyla yapılmıştır.

   Gereç ve yöntem: Çalışmada 90 adet tek köklü çekilmiş
insan dişi kullanılmıştır. Dişler preparasyon yapılıncaya kadar distile su
içerisinde bekletilmiştir. Her bir dişin kuron kısmı, mine-sement birleşim
yerinden 1 mm yukarıda olacak şekilde elmas silindirik frez yardımıyla
uzaklaştırılmıştır. Dişlere kanal tedavisi uygulanmış, daha sonra Cosmo post
sisteminde bulunan özel bir frez ile post boşlukları hazırlanmıştır. Kökler
uzun aksları horizontal düzleme dik olacak şekilde parelelometre ile akrilik
bloklara gömülmüştür. Elde edilen örnekler; kumlanmış ve kumlanmamış döküm post
ile hazır seramik post için 30’arlı üç gruba ayrılmıştır. Her grup da üç farklı
siman (çinko fosfat, cam iyonomer ve rezin siman) ile yapıştırılmak üzere
10’arlı üç alt gruba ayrılmıştır. Simantasyon sonrası hazırlanan örneklere
çekme kuvveti uygulanmıştır.   İstatiksel analizlerde ANOVA ve Duncan çoklu
karşılaştırma testi uygulanmıştır (P = 0.05).

Bulgular: Çalışmanın sonucunda, en iyi tutuculuğu çinko-fosfat siman ve cam
iyonomer siman ile yapıştırılan kumlanmış döküm post, en az
tutuculuğu ise rezin simanla yapıştırılan kumlanmamış döküm post sistemi ve
çinko-fosfat simanla yapıştırılan hazır seramik post sistemi göstermiştir.

Sonuçlar: Kumlama yapılmış postlar ile yapılmamış postlar karşılaştırıldığında,
kumlama sonucunda retansiyonda artış gözlenmiştir. Hazır seramik post için
ise en iyi retansiyon cam iyonomer siman grubunda görülmüştür.

Anahtar
Kelimeler: Bağlanma direnci, döküm post, seramik post,
siman, kumlama

 

SUMMARY 

Investigation of Effective of Adhesive Cements on the Bonding of
Different Post Systems

Aim: This study was carried out to investigate the effect of three different
cement (zinc phosphate, glass ionomer, resin cement) on the retention of
different post systems (cast post, ceramic post) and to determine the suitable
combination for retention.

Material and Methods: Ninety extracted human teeth with single root were used in the study. The
teeth were stored in distilled water until preparation. The crown of each tooth
was removed from one mm above of the cemento-enamel junction by using a diamond
cyclindirical bur. Endodontic treatment were performed on the teeth and post
spaces were prepared by using a special drill of Cosmo post systems. The roots
were embedded in acrylic blocks. The samples were divided into three groups
(sandblasting/ unsandblasting cast post or prefabricated ceramic post) (n=3).
Each of these groups was divided into 3 subgroups for three different cements
(zinc phosphate, glass ionomer and resin cement). After cementation, tensile
force was applied on the samples. ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range tests were
performed for statistical analysis (P = 0.05).

Results: According to the results of the variance analysis, it was found that
the post type (P < 0.001), the cement type and post-cement interaction had
statistically significant effect (P < 0.05) on the bond strength of post to
root dentin.

Conclusions:  The best retention was seen in
the sandblasting cast post cemented with zinc phosphate cement and with glass
ionomer cement. On the other hand, the prefabricated ceramic post cemented with
zinc phosphate cement and unsandblasting cast post cemented with resin cement
showed the least retention.

Keywords: Bond strength, cast post, ceramic post, cement, sandblasting.

Keywords

Bağlanma direnci, döküm post, seramik post, siman

References

• 1. D. Santos Pantaleon, B. R. Morrow, D. R. Cagna, C. H. Pameijer and F. Garcia-Godoy. 2018. Influence of remaining coronal tooth structure on fracture resistance and failure mode of restored endodontically treated maxillary incisors. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 119 (3): 390-396.
• 2. S. M. Morgano and P. Milot. 1993. Clinical success of cast metal posts and cores. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 70 (1): 11-16.
• 3. B. Habib, J. A. von Fraunhofer and C. F. Driscoll. 2005. Comparison of two luting agents used for the retention of cast dowel and cores. Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, 14 (3): 164-169.
• 4. P. F. Kurer. 1988. 'A clinical survey of failed post retained crowns'. British dental journal, 165 (12): 420.
• 5. K. L. O'Keefe, B. H. Miller and J. M. Powers. 2000. In vitro tensile bond strength of adhesive cements to new post materials. The International journal of prosthodontics, 13 (1): 47-51.
• 6. S. Munaga, A. Das, T. Kaur, A. Yaqoob, R. Mokashi and P. M. Ismail. 2018. Comparative Clinical Evaluation of Composite Overcast Gold Post and Core Buildups in Endodontically Treated Teeth. The journal of contemporary dental practice, 19 (10): 1273-1277.
• 7. J. N. Theodosopoulou and K. M. Chochlidakis. 2009. A systematic review of dowel (post) and core materials and systems. Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, 18 (6): 464-472.
• 8. E. T. Basaran and Y. Gokce. 2019. Evaluation of the influence of various restoration techniques on fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth with different cavity wall thicknesses. Niger J Clin Pract, 22 (3): 328-334.
• 9. G. Maroulakos, J. He and W. W. Nagy. 2018. The Post-endodontic Adhesive Interface: Theoretical Perspectives and Potential Flaws. Journal of endodontics, 44 (3): 363-371.
• 10. A. K. Culhaoglu, E. Özcan, M. A. Kilicarslan and E. Seker. 2017. Effect of Boric Acid Versus Conventional Irrigation Solutions on the Bond Strength Between Fiber Post and Root Dentin. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, 19 (2):
• 11. K. Aleisa, Z. N. Al-Dwairi, S. A. Alsubait and S. M. Morgano. 2016. Pull-out retentive strength of fiber posts cemented at different times in canals obturated with a eugenol-based sealer. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 116 (1): 85-90.
• 12. A. R. Helfer, S. Melnick and H. Schilder. 1972. Determination of the moisture content of vital and pulpless teeth. Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology, 34 (4): 661-670.
• 13. C. Zamin, Y. T. Silva-Sousa, A. E. Souza-Gabriel, D. F. Messias and M. D. Sousa-Neto. 2012. Fracture susceptibility of endodontically treated teeth. Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology, 28 (4): 282-286.
• 14. D. Assif, E. Oren, B. L. Marshak and I. Aviv. 1989. Photoelastic analysis of stress transfer by endodontically treated teeth to the supporting structure using different restorative techniques. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 61 (5): 535-543.
• 15. P. Moulin, M. Degrange and B. Picard. 1999. Influence of surface treatment on adherence energy of alloys used in bonded prosthetics. J Oral Rehabil, 26 (5): 413-421.
• 16. I. Nergiz, P. Schmage, U. Platzer and C. G. McMullan-Vogel. 1997. Effect of different surface textures on retentive strength of tapered posts. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 78 (5): 451-457.
• 17. B. I. Cohen, B. L. Musikant and A. S. Deutsch. 1993. Comparison of the retentive properties of two hollow-tube post systems to those of a solid post design. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 70 (3): 234-238.
• 18. J. P. Duncan and C. H. Pameijer. 1998. Retention of parallel-sided titanium posts cemented with six luting agents: an in vitro study. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 80 (4): 423-428.
• 19. D. B. Mendoza and W. S. Eakle. 1994. Retention of posts cemented with various dentinal bonding cements. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 72 (6): 591-594.
• 20. S. Marchan, L. Coldero, R. Whiting and S. Barclay. 2005. In vitro evaluation of the retention of zirconia-based ceramic posts luted with glass ionomer and resin cements. Brazilian dental journal, 16 (3): 213-217.
• 21. V. C. Macedo, A. L. Faria e Silva and L. R. Martins. 2010. Effect of cement type, relining procedure, and length of cementation on pull-out bond strength of fiber posts. J Endod, 36 (9): 1543-1546.
• 22. J. Ebert, A. Leyer, O. Gunther, U. Lohbauer, A. Petschelt, R. Frankenberger, et al. 2011. Bond strength of adhesive cements to root canal dentin tested with a novel pull-out approach. J Endod, 37 (11): 1558-1561.
• 23. C. D'Arcangelo, M. Cinelli, F. De Angelis and M. D'Amario. 2007. The effect of resin cement film thickness on the pullout strength of a fiber-reinforced post system. J Prosthet Dent, 98 (3): 193-198.
• 24. K. Kremeier, L. Fasen, B. Klaiber and N. Hofmann. 2008. Influence of endodontic post type (glass fiber, quartz fiber or gold) and luting material on push-out bond strength to dentin in vitro. Dent Mater, 24 (5): 660-666.
• 25. U. Erdemir, E. Mumcu, F. T. Topcu, E. Yildiz, K. Yamanel and M. Akyol. 2010. Micro push-out bond strengths of 2 fiber post types luted using different adhesive strategies. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics, 110 (4): 534-544.
• 26. H. Ari, E. Yasar and S. Belli. 2003. Effects of NaOCl on bond strengths of resin cements to root canal dentin. J Endod, 29 (4): 248-251.
• 27. C. Goracci, A. U. Tavares, A. Fabianelli, F. Monticelli, O. Raffaelli, P. C. Cardoso, et al. 2004. The adhesion between fiber posts and root canal walls: comparison between microtensile and push-out bond strength measurements. Eur J Oral Sci, 112 (4): 353-361.