Cement layer thickness and shear stress resistance in cylindrical dowel spaces: pull-out test.

ORAL and Implantology Pub Date : 2017-01-21 eCollection Date: 2017-10-01 DOI:10.11138/orl/2017.10.4.439
M Andreasi Bassi, D Lauritano, M Brizzi, C Andrisani, S Lico, V Candotto
{"title":"Cement layer thickness and shear stress resistance in cylindrical dowel spaces: pull-out test.","authors":"M Andreasi Bassi,&nbsp;D Lauritano,&nbsp;M Brizzi,&nbsp;C Andrisani,&nbsp;S Lico,&nbsp;V Candotto","doi":"10.11138/orl/2017.10.4.439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study evaluated the effects of different dowel space (DS) diameters on pull-out bond strength of a cylindrical post, of threaded steel, to dentin.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Forty-five extracted human teeth were divided in 3 groups with DSs, with the same depth (6 mm), differing for the diameter (i.e. 1.5 mm, Group 1; 1.75 mm, Group 2; 2.00 mm, Group 3). Both the diameter of the post (1.3 mm) and the composite resin cement (Panavia 21) were the same for all the samples. The samples were submitted to pull-out test by means an Universal Testing Machine (Mod. 1193, Instron) (1KN load cell, crosshead speed 0.5 mm/min).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean values of the bond strength (BS) were: Group 1, 442±128.3N; Group 2, 411.3±111N; Group 3, 448.7±142.29N. While the calculated average shear bond strengths (SBSs) were: Group 1, 14.7±4.27MPa; Group 2, 11.6±3.14MPa; Group 3, 11±3.5MPa. ANOVA test showed not significative differences, among the groups, concerning the BS: Group 1 <i>vs</i> Group 2 (p = 0.490); Group 1 <i>vs</i> Group 3 (p = 0.894); Group 2 <i>vs</i> Group 3 (p = 0.431). Significative differences were observed, among the groups, concerning the SBS for Group 1 <i>vs</i> Group 2 (p = 0.032) and Group 1 <i>vs</i> Group 3 (p = 0.014). While a not significative difference was found, concerning this parameter, for Group 2 <i>vs</i> Group 3 (p = 0.641).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The cement thickness can influence the SBS of the adhesively luted posts, in our setting, the best values were obtained with a thickness of 100 μm.</p>","PeriodicalId":38303,"journal":{"name":"ORAL and Implantology","volume":"10 4","pages":"439-447"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5892652/pdf/439-447.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ORAL and Implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11138/orl/2017.10.4.439","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluated the effects of different dowel space (DS) diameters on pull-out bond strength of a cylindrical post, of threaded steel, to dentin.

Materials and methods: Forty-five extracted human teeth were divided in 3 groups with DSs, with the same depth (6 mm), differing for the diameter (i.e. 1.5 mm, Group 1; 1.75 mm, Group 2; 2.00 mm, Group 3). Both the diameter of the post (1.3 mm) and the composite resin cement (Panavia 21) were the same for all the samples. The samples were submitted to pull-out test by means an Universal Testing Machine (Mod. 1193, Instron) (1KN load cell, crosshead speed 0.5 mm/min).

Results: The mean values of the bond strength (BS) were: Group 1, 442±128.3N; Group 2, 411.3±111N; Group 3, 448.7±142.29N. While the calculated average shear bond strengths (SBSs) were: Group 1, 14.7±4.27MPa; Group 2, 11.6±3.14MPa; Group 3, 11±3.5MPa. ANOVA test showed not significative differences, among the groups, concerning the BS: Group 1 vs Group 2 (p = 0.490); Group 1 vs Group 3 (p = 0.894); Group 2 vs Group 3 (p = 0.431). Significative differences were observed, among the groups, concerning the SBS for Group 1 vs Group 2 (p = 0.032) and Group 1 vs Group 3 (p = 0.014). While a not significative difference was found, concerning this parameter, for Group 2 vs Group 3 (p = 0.641).

Conclusion: The cement thickness can influence the SBS of the adhesively luted posts, in our setting, the best values were obtained with a thickness of 100 μm.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
柱形销钉空间中水泥层厚度和抗剪应力:拉出试验。
目的:本研究评估不同钉距(DS)直径对螺纹钢圆柱桩与牙本质的拉出结合强度的影响。材料与方法:将45颗拔除的人牙分为3组,深度相同(6mm),直径不同(1.5 mm), 1组;1.75 mm,第二组;2.00 mm,组3)。所有样品的桩径(1.3 mm)和复合树脂水泥(Panavia 21)均相同。样品通过万能试验机(型号1193,Instron) (1KN称重传感器,十字头速度0.5 mm/min)进行拉出试验。结果:粘接强度(BS)平均值为:1组,442±128.3N;第2组,411.3±111N;第3组,448.7±142.29N。计算得到的平均剪切黏结强度(sbs)为:1组,14.7±4.27MPa;第二组,11.6±3.14MPa;第3组,11±3.5MPa。方差分析显示,组间BS无显著差异:组1 vs组2 (p = 0.490);1组vs 3组(p = 0.894);2组vs 3组(p = 0.431)。1组与2组、1组与3组的SBS差异有统计学意义(p = 0.032)。而在该参数方面,2组与3组无显著差异(p = 0.641)。结论:骨水泥厚度会影响粘接桩的SBS,以100 μm的骨水泥厚度为最佳。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ORAL and Implantology
ORAL and Implantology Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Risk assessment of colonization of legionella spp. in dental unit waterlines. Clinical protocol with digital cad/cam chairside workflow for the rehabilitation of severely worn dentition patients. Correlations between dental malocclusions, ocular motility, and convergence disorders: a cross-sectional study in growing subjects. Obstructive site localization in patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome: a comparison between otolaryngologic data and cephalometric values. Prosthetic management of patients with oro-maxillo-facial defects: a long-term follow-up retrospective study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1