Bond strength between cements and metals used for endodontic posts

被引:26
作者
Miller, BH
Nakajima, H
Powers, JM
Nunn, ME
机构
[1] Texas A&M Univ, Baylor Coll Dent, Dept Biomat Sci, Dallas, TX 75246 USA
[2] Texas A&M Univ, Baylor Coll Dent, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, Dallas, TX USA
[3] Meikai Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Dent Mat Sci, Meikai, Saitama, Japan
[4] Univ Texas, Dept Basic Sci, Dent Branch, Houston, TX 77225 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0109-5641(98)00044-X
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives. Adhesive cements used with metal endodontic posts may decrease fracture in non-vital teeth. Results from studies that evaluate cements far post retention by pulling posts out of extracted teeth are difficult to interpret owing to the number of interfaces where fracture might occur. The objective of this study was to isolate the metal/cement interface for tensile bond strength testing and microscopic observation. Methods. Three metals and seven cement treatments were examined for bond strength by using a truncated cane tensile test. The bond strength data were analyzed by a two-way ANOVA and Scheffe's multiple comparison test at p = 0.05. Specimens were examined at 50x magnification to determine the failure mode and with scanning electron microscopy (500x) to observe the surfaces after debonding. Results. Significant differences in tensile bond strengths were found among cements compared within two of the metal groups. One of the metal groups had no significant differences among cement bonds. When comparing within cement treatment groups, two groups had significant differences in bond strength among the metals. Microscopic observations revealed adhesive, cohesive and mixed failure modes that varied with cement treatment and metal combination. The interaction between metal and cement was a critical determinant of the strength and characteristic fracture mode of the bond achieved. Significance. Some of the cement treatments performed better (i.e., higher bond strength) with some metals than with others. Other cements had similar bond strengths with all three metals. Because of this interaction, careful consideration of the materials combination should help to maximize the bond at the metal/cement interface. (C) 1999 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:312 / 320
页数:9
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
Alexander J C, 1993, J Clin Orthod, V27, P207
[2]  
*AM SOC MET HDB CO, 1980, MET HDB, V3
[3]   TENSILE FATIGUE LIMITS OF PROSTHODONTIC ADHESIVES [J].
AQUILINO, SA ;
DIAZARNOLD, AM ;
PIOTROWSKI, TJ .
JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1991, 70 (03) :208-210
[4]   INVITRO BOND STRENGTH OF CEMENTS TO TREATED TEETH [J].
BARAKAT, MM ;
POWERS, JM .
AUSTRALIAN DENTAL JOURNAL, 1986, 31 (06) :415-419
[5]  
BARZILAY I, 1990, J DENT RES, V69, P363
[6]   RETENTION CAPACITY OF THE BRACKET BASES OF NEW AESTHETIC ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS [J].
BLALOCK, KA ;
POWERS, JM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 1995, 107 (06) :596-603
[7]   THE RESISTANCE TO TENSILE, COMPRESSION, AND TORSIONAL FORCES PROVIDED BY 4 POST SYSTEMS [J].
BURGESS, JO ;
SUMMITT, JB ;
ROBBINS, JW .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 1992, 68 (06) :899-903
[8]   THE EFFECT OF POST ADAPTATION IN THE ROOT-CANAL ON RETENTION OF POSTS CEMENTED WITH VARIOUS CEMENTS [J].
CHAN, FW ;
HARCOURT, JK ;
BROCKHURST, PJ .
AUSTRALIAN DENTAL JOURNAL, 1993, 38 (01) :39-45
[9]  
Chang J C, 1993, J Prosthodont, V2, P110, DOI 10.1111/j.1532-849X.1993.tb00391.x
[10]  
COLEMAN RA, 1987, J DENT RES, V66, P135