INFLUENCE OF LUTING AGENTS ON TIME REQUIRED FOR CAST POST REMOVAL BY ULTRASOUND: AN IN VITRO STUDY

Objective: This in vitro study evaluated the influence of luting agents on ultrasonic vibration time for intraradicular cast post removal. Material and Methods: After endodontic treatment, 30 roots of extracted human canines were embedded in resin cylinders. The post-holes were prepared at 10 mm depth and their impressions were taken using autopolymerizing acrylic resin. After casting procedures using a nickel-chromium alloy, the posts were randomly distributed into 3 groups (n=10) according to the luting material: G1- zinc phosphate (SS White) (control group), G2 - glass ionomer cement (Vidrion C; SS White), and G3- resin cement (C&B; Bisco). In G3, the adhesive procedure was performed before post cementation. After 24 h, the cement line was removed at the post/tooth interface using a fine diamond bur, and the ST-09 tip of an Enac ultrasound unit was applied at maximum power on all surfaces surrounding the posts. The application time was recorded with a chronometer until the post was completely dislodged and data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's test (p<0.05). Results: The roots were removed from the acrylic resin and inspected to detect cracks and/or fractures. The means for G1, G2, and G3 were 168.5, 59.5, and 285 s, respectively, with statistically significant differences among them. Two G3 posts resisted removal, one of which developed a vertical fracture line. Conclusions: Therefore, the cement type had a direct influence on the time required for ultrasonic post removal. Compared to the zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cements, the resin cement required a longer ultrasonic vibration time.

[1]  Paul V Abbott,et al.  A survey of methods used for post removal in specialist endodontic practice. , 2002, International endodontic journal.

[2]  S. Scherrer,et al.  Rotational fatigue-resistance of seven post types anchored on natural teeth. , 2007, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[3]  N. Lang,et al.  Clinical evaluation of root filled teeth restored with or without post-and-core systems in a specialist practice setting. , 2007, International endodontic journal.

[4]  M. Sousa-Neto,et al.  Influence of ultrasound, with and without water spray cooling, on removal of posts cemented with resin or zinc phosphate cements. , 2004, Journal of endodontics.

[5]  G. Adabo,et al.  Comparison of the tensile bond strengths of cast metal crowns luted with resin cements. , 2004, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[6]  M. Hagge,et al.  Retention strengths of five luting cements on prefabricated dowels after root canal obturation with a zinc oxide/eugenol sealer: 1. Dowel space preparation/cementation at one week after obturation. , 2002, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[7]  Richard S Schwartz,et al.  Post placement and restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a literature review. , 2004, Journal of endodontics.

[8]  L. F. Pegoraro,et al.  Tensile bond strength of glass fiber posts luted with different cements. , 2007, Brazilian oral research.

[9]  D. Gemalmaz,et al.  Retentive properties of five different luting cements on base and noble metal copings. , 2002, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[10]  F. Tay,et al.  The contribution of friction to the dislocation resistance of bonded fiber posts. , 2005, Journal of endodontics.

[11]  F. Tay,et al.  Factors contributing to the incompatibility between simplified-step adhesives and self-cured or dual-cured composites. Part II. Single-bottle, total-etch adhesive. , 2003, The journal of adhesive dentistry.

[12]  F. Tay,et al.  Effect of hygroscopic expansion on the push-out resistance of glass ionomer-based cements used for the luting of glass fiber posts. , 2006, Journal of endodontics.

[13]  L. Paulillo,et al.  Influence of additional adhesive application on the microtensile bond strength of adhesive systems. , 2006, Operative dentistry.

[14]  C. Soares,et al.  Effects of post system and length on the strain and fracture resistance of root filled bovine teeth. , 2008, International endodontic journal.

[15]  Jack I Nicholls,et al.  Comparison of two ultrasonic instruments for post removal. , 2002, Journal of endodontics.

[16]  V. B. GOLDSTEIN-JOURDAN [Dental cements]. , 1951, Revista odontologica do Parana.

[17]  C. Goracci,et al.  Laboratory assessment of the retentive potential of adhesive posts: a review. , 2007, Journal of dentistry.

[18]  D. Purton,et al.  Factors influencing the removal of posts. , 2003, International endodontic journal.

[19]  N. Hofmann,et al.  Influence of endodontic post type (glass fiber, quartz fiber or gold) and luting material on push-out bond strength to dentin in vitro. , 2008, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[20]  R. Ribeiro,et al.  Tensile bond strength of cast commercially pure titanium and cast gold-alloy posts and cores cemented with two luting agents. , 2008, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[21]  Carl F Driscoll,et al.  Comparison of two luting agents used for the retention of cast dowel and cores. , 2005, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[22]  P. Abbott Incidence of root fractures and methods used for post removal. , 2002, International Endodontic Journal.

[23]  R. Padilha,et al.  The influence of ultrasound on the retention of cast posts cemented with different agents. , 2001, International endodontic journal.