Pull-out Retentive Resistance of Fiber Posts Restored with Different Core Materials

Year 2022, Volume: 23 Issue: 2, 182 - 187, 30.06.2022

Can Topkara Koray Yılmaz Mustafa Gündoğar , Gülşah Uslu , Taha Özyürek

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess the pull-out bonding resistance of FiberSite and RelyX Fiber posts constructed from core structures using various resin cement.
Materials and Methods: Sixty mandibular premolar teeth were horizontally sectioned to create a root canal length of 15±1 mm. Up to size #40, samples were prepared and obturated with gutta-percha and root canal sealer. Three groups of specimens (n=20) were formed. FiberSite posts were luted and built-up using Clearfil DC Core Plus in Group 1, RelyX Fiber posts were luted and built-up using Clearfil DC Core Plus in Group 2, and RelyX Fiber Posts were luted and built-up using Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior in Group 3. Each specimen was vertically positioned in a universal testing machine and rotated at 0.5 mm/min until it dislodged. Oneway ANOVA and post hoc tests were used to evaluate the data.
Results: The bonding strength of FiberSite posts was higher than that of RelyX Fiber posts (p<0.05). Clearfil DC Core Plus-built RelyX Fiber Posts exhibited higher bond strength than Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior-built posts (p<0.05).
Conclusion: FiberSite posts provide better root canal dentin retention than RelyX Fiber posts with different core materials.

Keywords

Pull-out test, endodontics, fiber post, post retention, resin cement

References

• 1. Malone WFP, Koth DL, Cavazos E, Kaiser DA, Morgano SM, Tylman SD. Tylman’s theory and practice of fixed prosthodontics. St. Louis: Ishiyaku Euro-America, 1989.
• 2. Chuang SF, Yaman P, Herrero A, Dennison JB, Chang CH. Influence of post material and length on endodontically treated incisors: an in vitro and finite element study. J Prosthet Dent 2010; 104: 379-88.
• 3. Stewardson DA. Non-metal post systems. Dental Update 2001; 28: 326-36.
• 4. Schmitter M, Rammelsberg P, Gabbert O, Ohlmann B. Influence of clinical baseline findings on the survival of 2 post systems: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont 2007; 20: 173-8.
• 5. Gündoğar M, Uslu G, Yılmaz K, Topkara G, Özyürek T. Comparison of Push-out Bond Strenght of FiberSite and RelyX Fiber Post Systems to Root Canal Dentin. Türkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci 2018; 24: 33-8.
• 6. Van Ende A, De Munck J, Lise DP, Van Meerbeek B. Bulk-fill composites: a review of the current literature. J Adhes Dent 2017; 19: 95-109.
• 7. Isufi A, Plotino G, Grande NM, Loppolo P, Testarelli L, Bedini R, et al. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with a bulkfill flowable material and a resin composite. Ann Stomatol (Roma) 2016; 7: 4-10.
• 8. Li Q, Xu B, Wang Y, Cai Y. Effects of auxiliary fiber posts on endodontically treated teeth with flared canals. Oper Dent 2011; 36: 380-9.
• 9. Giachetti L, Russo DS, Bertini F, Giuliani V. Translucent fiber post cementation using a light-curing adhesive/composite system: SEM analysis and pull-out test. J Dent 2004; 32: 629-34.
• 10. Özyürek T, Topkara C, Koçak İ, Yılmaz K, Gündoğar M, Uslu G. Fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth restored with different fiber post and core systems. Odontology 2020; 108: 588-95.
• 11. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971; 32: 271-5.
• 12. Wu MK, Wesselink PR. A primary observation on the preparation and obturation of oval canals. Int Endod J 2001; 34: 137-41.
• 13. Morgano SM. Restoration of pulpless teeth: application of traditional principles in present and future contexts. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75: 375-80.
• 14. Clearfil DC Core Plus. Available from: [https://www.kuraraynoritake.eu/pub/media/pdfs/19810\_1\_CLEARFIL\_DC\_Core\_Plus\_folder\_HR.pdf](https://www.kuraraynoritake.eu/pub/media/pdfs/19810_1_CLEARFIL_DC_Core_Plus_folder_HR.pdf). Accessed February 27, 2021.
• 15. Frassetto A, Navarra CO, Marchesi G, Turco G, Di Lenarda R, Breschi L, et al. Kinetics of polymerization and contraction stress development in self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater 2012; 28: 1032-9.
• 16. Jongsma LA, Bolhuis PB, Pallav P, Feilzer AJ, Kleverlaan CJ. Benefits of a two-step cementation procedure for prefabricated fiber posts. J Adhes Dent 2010; 12: 55-62.
• 17. Goracci C, Tavares AU, Fabianelli A, Monticelli F, Raffaelli O, Cardoso PC, et al. 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.
• 18. Drummond JL, Sakaguchi RL, Racean DC, Wozny J, Steinberg AD. Testing mode and surface treatment effects on dentin bonding. J Biomed Mater Res 1996; 32: 533-41.
• 19. Amižić IP, Miletić I, Baraba A, Fan Y, Nathanson D. In vitro retention of prefabricated and individually formed posts: A pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 2018; 120: 553-7.
• 20. Binus S, Koch A, Petschelt A, Berthold C. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth with major hard tissue loss–bond strength of conventionally and adhesively luted fiber‐reinforced composite posts. Dent Traumatol 2013; 29: 339-54.
• 21. Filtek Bulkfill Posterior. Available from: [https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/976634O/filtek-bulk-fill-posterior-restorativetechnical-product-profile.pdf](https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/976634O/filtek-bulk-fill-posterior-restorativetechnical-product-profile.pdf). Accessed on February 27, 2021.
• 22. De‐Deus G, Simões‐Carvalho M, Belladonna FG, Versiani MA, Silva EJNL, Cavalcante DM, et al. Creation of well‐balanced experimental groups for comparative endodontic laboratory studies: a new proposal based on micro‐CT and in silico methods. Int Endod J 2020; 53: 974-85.