107 resultados para online course materials
Resumo:
Introduction: A common complication during the restoration of severely destroyed teeth is the loss of coronal root dentine. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different sealers on the bonding interface of weakened roots reinforced with resin and fiber posts. Methods: Sixty extracted maxillary canines were used. The crowns were removed, and the thickness of root dentine was reduced in the experimental (n = 40) and positive control (n = 10) groups. The specimens of experimental group were assigned to four subgroups (n = 10) according to the filling material: gutta-percha + Grossmann`s sealer, gutta-percha + AH Plus (Dentsply De Trey Gmbh, Konstanz, Germany), gutta-percha + Epiphany (Pentron Clinical Technologies, Wallingford, CT), and Resilon (Resilon Research LLC, Madison, CT) + Epiphany. In the negative control group (n = 10), canals were not filled. After post space preparation, the roots were restored with composite resin light-activated through a translucent fiber post. After 24 hours, specimens were transversally sectioned into 1-mm-thick slices. Push-out test and scanning electron microscopic (SEM) analyses of different regions were performed. Data from push-out test were analyzed by using Tukey post hoc multiple comparison tests. The percentage of failure type was calculated. Data from SEM analysis were compared by Friedman and Kruskal-Wallis tests (alpha = 0.05). Results: The mean bond strength was significantly higher in the negative control group as compared with the other groups (P < .05). In all groups, the most frequent type of failure was adhesive. Overall, apical and middle regions presented a lower density of resin tags than the coronal region (P < .05). Conclusions: The push-out bond strength was not affected by sealer or region. The canal region affected significantly the resin tag morphology and density at the bonding interface. (J Endod 2011;37:531-537)
Resumo:
Objective: To evaluate the influence of different endodontic materials on root fracture susceptibility. Methods: Seventy-two mandibular incisors were sectioned 1 mm below the cementoenamel junction to obtain roots of 12 mm length. Roots were submitted to chemomechanical preparation with the rotary instruments of Profile system. The obturation of root canals were performed with the following filling materials (n = 12): GI, unfilled teeth (control); GII, Endofill + gutta-percha; GIII, Sealer 26 + gutta-percha; GIV, AH Plus + gutta-percha; GV, Epiphany + gutta-percha; GVI, Epiphany + Resilon. After the sealers setting time, each root was embedded in acrylic resin. The specimens were then submitted to fracture resistance test using an Instron testing machine at 1 mm/min. Results: The ANOVA test showed no significant statistical difference (p > .05) among GI (162.16 +/- 41.4N), GII (168.46 +/- 37.5N), GIII (164.83 +/- 35.7N), GIV (168.29 +/- 38.7N), GV (172.36 +/- 20.6N) and GVI (193.11 +/- 42.8N). Conclusion: The core materials (gutta-percha or Resilon) combined with the tested endodontic sealers are not able to increase the root fracture resistance in canals submitted to chemomechanical preparation. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.