Logotipo do repositório
 

Publicação:
Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth: Influence of the post systems and cements

dc.contributor.authorDe Matos, Luanne
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, Lucas [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSilva, Aryvelto [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSilva, Jessica [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSilva, Marcelo
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.institutionFACID WYDEN
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-25T10:18:39Z
dc.date.available2021-06-25T10:18:39Z
dc.date.issued2020-11-01
dc.description.abstractBackground: Endodontically treated teeth with extensive structural damage present higher fragility due to the low amount and worse quality of the reminiscent tissues of the crown. Materials and Methods: The present in vitro study evaluated the effect of different intraradicular retainers and cementation agents on the fracture resistance of devitalized teeth. Incisive teeth (n = 40) of bovine mandibles were used. After preparation of the root canals, they were immersed in polyether, in a polyvinyl chloride cylinder containing acrylic resin, to simulate the periodontal ligament. The specimens were randomly divided into four groups (n = 10), according to the type of retainer (anatomical or main with accessory posts) and resin cement used (conventional resin cement-RelyX ARC or self-adhesive resin cement-RelyX U200). The specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C and submitted to fracture resistance testing. ANOVA and Tukey's test were applied for data analysis, with significance level set at 5%. Results: There was no interaction between cement type and intraradicular retainers (P = 0.56) or even between the types of cement used (P = 0.65). However, in the variation of the types of retainers, the group using main with accessory posts presented greater resistance to the fracture than the anatomical post (P = 0.04). Conclusion: Different cementing agents have no effect on the fracture strength of devitalized teeth, unlike the use of posts, in which the use of accessory post proved more resistant when compared to the anatomical post.en
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Prosthesis and Periodontics School of Dentistry Campinas University
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics School of Dentistry Saõ Paulo State University (Unesp), 1680 Humaita Street, Centro
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Restorative Dentistry School of Dentistry Saõ Paulo State University (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Dentistry School of Dentistry Wyden Educational Group FACID WYDEN
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics School of Dentistry Saõ Paulo State University (Unesp), 1680 Humaita Street, Centro
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Restorative Dentistry School of Dentistry Saõ Paulo State University (Unesp)
dc.format.extent417-423
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.302888
dc.identifier.citationDental Research Journal, v. 17, n. 6, p. 417-423, 2020.
dc.identifier.doi10.4103/1735-3327.302888
dc.identifier.issn2008-0255
dc.identifier.issn1735-3327
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85098118107
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/205632
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofDental Research Journal
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectDental cements
dc.subjectdental pins
dc.subjecttooth fractures
dc.titleResistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth: Influence of the post systems and cementsen
dc.typeArtigo
dspace.entity.typePublication

Arquivos

Coleções