Push-out bond strength and SEM evaluation of a new bonding approach into the root canal

Objective: This study evaluated the performance of different adhesive systems in fiber post placement aiming to clarify the influence of different hydrophobic experimental blend adhesives, and of one commercially available adhesive on the frictional retention during a luting procedure. Material and Methods: One luting agent (70 Wt% BisGMA, 28.5% TEGDMA; 1.5% p-tolyldiethanolamine) to cement fiber posts into root canals was applied with 4 different adhesive combinations: Group 1: The etched roots were rinsed with water for 30 s to remove the phosphoric acid, then rinsed with 99.6% ethanol for 30 s, and blot-dried. A trial adhesive (base to catalyst on a 1: 1 ratio) was used with an experimental luting agent (35% Bis-GMA, 14.37% TEGDMA, 0.5% EDMAB, 0.13% CQ); Group 2: A trial adhesive (base to catalyst on a 1: 2 ratio) was luted as in Group 1; Group 3: One-Step Plus (OSP, Bisco Inc.) following the ethanol bonding technique in combination with the luting agent as in Group 1; Group 4: OSP strictly following the manufacturer's instructions using the luting agent as in Group 1. The groups were challenged with push-out tests. Posted root slices were loaded until post segment extrusion in the apical-coronal direction. Failure modes were analyzed under scanning electron microscopy. Results: Push-out strength was not significantly influenced by the luting agent (p>0.05). No statistically significant differences among the tested groups were found as Group 1 (Exp 1 - ethanol-wet bonding technique)=Group 2 (Exp 2 - ethanol-wet bonding technique)= Group 3 (OSP - ethanol-wet bonding technique)= Group 4 (control, OSP - water-wet bonding technique) (p>0.05). The dominating failure modes in all the groups were cohesive/adhesive failures, which were predominantly observed on the post/luting agent interface. Conclusions: The results of this study support the hypothesis that the proposal to replace water with ethanol to bond fiber posts to the root canal using highly hydrophobic resin is plausible, but this seems to be more the proof of a concept than a clinically applicable procedure.

Effect of the root canal final rinse protocols on the debris and smear layer removal and on the push-out strength of an epoxy-based sealer

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of QMiX, SmearClear, and 17% EDTA for the debris and smear layer removal from the root canal and its effects on the push-out bond strength of an epoxy-based sealer by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Forty extracted human canines (n = 10) were assigned to the following final rinse protocols: G1-distilled water (control), G2–17% EDTA, G3-SmearClear, and G4-QMiX. The specimens were submitted to a SEM analysis to evaluate the presence of debris and smear layer, respectively, in the apical or cervical segments. In sequence, forty extracted human maxillary canines with the root canals instrumented were divided into four groups (n = 10) similar to the SEM analysis study. After the filling with AH Plus, the roots were transversally sectioned to obtain dentinal slices. The specimens were submitted to a push-out bond strength test using an electromechanical testing machine. The statistical analysis for the SEM and push-out bond strength studies were performed using the Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn tests (α = 5%). There was no difference among the G2, G3, and G4 efficacy in removing the debris and smear layer (P > 0.05). The efficacy of these groups was superior to the control group. The push-out bond strength values of G2, G3, and G4 were superior to the control group. The ability to remove the debris and smear layer by SmearClear and QMiX was as effective as the 17% EDTA. The final rinse with these solutions promoted similar push-out bond strength values.