Journal de chirurgie universelle

  • ISSN: 2254-6758
  • Indice h du journal: 8
  • Note de citation du journal: 1.33
  • Facteur d’impact du journal: 1.34
Indexé dans
  • Genamics JournalSeek
  • Répertoire d'indexation des revues de recherche (DRJI)
  • OCLC - WorldCat
  • Pub européen
  • Google Scholar
  • SHERPA ROMÉO
Partager cette page

Abstrait

Effect of Surface Treatment on Retention of Prefabricated Glass-fiber Posts

Setayesh Farzad,Imani-Emadi MohammadMehdi,Khodabakhsh Marziyeh,Saki Golnaz,Mirsalehi Seyed-Hasan

Backgrounds: Coronal reconstruction of anterior teeth after root canal therapy is very important. One of the common treatments of these teeth is by using the glass-fiber posts. The aim of this study was to compare the retention of glass-fiber posts with two different surface treatment methods in maxillary central incisors.

Methods and Materials: Forty-eight extracted non carious human maxillary central incisors were selected. The coronal aspect of each tooth was removed from cemento-enamel Junction, and the remaining root received root canal therapy. Post spaces were prepared in all specimens to a depth of 8 millimeters by using a peeso-reamer size 5. The teeth were divided randomly into three groups of 16 teeth. The glass-fiber posts with differentsurface treatments were cemented in each group; A. no surface treatment in glass-fiber posts (control group), B. surface treatment with sandblast on glass-fiber posts, and C. surface treatment with ethanol on glass-fiber posts. All specimens were mounted in acrylic resin. Finally, a Universal Testing Machine was used to apply tensile load to dislodge each post from the prepared postspace. Statistical analysis was performed at the significance level of 0.05. Results: The mean tensile force for removing the posts of each groups in Kilo Newton were as follows: A. 0.164, B. 0.164, and C. 0.165. There was no significant difference among the three groups.

Conclusion: Treating the surface of the glass-fiber posts with sandblast or ethanol before cementation with Panavia F 2.0 cement produced no significant improvement in the retention of the posts.

Avertissement: Ce résumé a été traduit à l'aide d'outils d'intelligence artificielle et n'a pas encore été examiné ni vérifié