Gokhan Akgungor1, Begum Akkayan. 1. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul University, Turkey.
Abstract
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Debonding is the most frequent failure encountered with translucent fiber posts and usually occurs along the post space dentin-adhesive interface. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of different dentin bonding agents and polymerization modes on the bond strength between translucent fiber posts and root dentin in different regions of the post space. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty maxillary canines with similar root lengths were selected, sectioned at the cemento-enamel junction, and the roots were endodontically treated. Following post space preparation, the roots were divided into 4 groups of 10 specimens each, and the post spaces were treated with 1 of 4 different dentin bonding agents: light-polymerized, single-bottle bonding agent Excite (Group EX); dual-polymerized, single-bottle bonding agent Excite DSC (Group EX-DSC); self-etching primer Clearfil Liner Bond 2V with a light-polymerized bonding agent, Bond A (Group CL-LC); or self-etching primer Clearfil Liner Bond 2V with a dual-polymerized bonding agent, Bond A+B (Group CL-DC). Translucent fiber posts (D.T. Light-Post), 2.2 mm in diameter, were luted (Panavia F) in each specimen after respective dentin bonding procedures. The roots were cut into 3-mm-thick sections, perpendicular to the long-axis in cervical, middle, and apical post space dentin. Push-out tests were performed with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min, and bond strength values (MPa) were calculated by dividing the force at which bond failure occurred by the bonded area of the post. The data were analyzed with 1- and 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey multiple comparison tests (alpha=.05). Dentin adhesive bonding mechanisms in different regions of the post spaces were evaluated with a scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: The highest mean bond strength values were obtained for Group CL-LC (18.3 +/- 4.1 MPa). The dual-polymerized bonding agent resulted in significantly lower bond strength (P<.001) in combination with self-etching primer (Group CL-DC) (13.2 +/- 2.5 MPa). The light-polymerized and dual-polymerized single-bottle bonding agents provided similar bond strengths (12.7 +/- 5.0 for EX; 13.5 +/- 5.3 for EX-DSC). The regional bond strength values of single-bottle bonding agents were reduced significantly in apical post space dentin (P<.001). Self-etching primers did not demonstrate regional differences in post space dentin bonding and dense resin tags were apparent. CONCLUSION: Data suggests that the self-etching primer system used in this study was unaffected by the morphological variations in the post space dentin compared to the single-bottle bonding agents. Dual polymerization did not improve the bond strength values of the bonding agents tested.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Debonding is the most frequent failure encountered with translucent fiber posts and usually occurs along the post space dentin-adhesive interface. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of different dentin bonding agents and polymerization modes on the bond strength between translucent fiber posts and root dentin in different regions of the post space. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty maxillary canines with similar root lengths were selected, sectioned at the cemento-enamel junction, and the roots were endodontically treated. Following post space preparation, the roots were divided into 4 groups of 10 specimens each, and the post spaces were treated with 1 of 4 different dentin bonding agents: light-polymerized, single-bottle bonding agent Excite (Group EX); dual-polymerized, single-bottle bonding agent Excite DSC (Group EX-DSC); self-etching primer Clearfil Liner Bond 2V with a light-polymerized bonding agent, Bond A (Group CL-LC); or self-etching primer Clearfil Liner Bond 2V with a dual-polymerized bonding agent, Bond A+B (Group CL-DC). Translucent fiber posts (D.T. Light-Post), 2.2 mm in diameter, were luted (Panavia F) in each specimen after respective dentin bonding procedures. The roots were cut into 3-mm-thick sections, perpendicular to the long-axis in cervical, middle, and apical post space dentin. Push-out tests were performed with a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min, and bond strength values (MPa) were calculated by dividing the force at which bond failure occurred by the bonded area of the post. The data were analyzed with 1- and 2-way analysis of variance and Tukey multiple comparison tests (alpha=.05). Dentin adhesive bonding mechanisms in different regions of the post spaces were evaluated with a scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: The highest mean bond strength values were obtained for Group CL-LC (18.3 +/- 4.1 MPa). The dual-polymerized bonding agent resulted in significantly lower bond strength (P<.001) in combination with self-etching primer (Group CL-DC) (13.2 +/- 2.5 MPa). The light-polymerized and dual-polymerized single-bottle bonding agents provided similar bond strengths (12.7 +/- 5.0 for EX; 13.5 +/- 5.3 for EX-DSC). The regional bond strength values of single-bottle bonding agents were reduced significantly in apical post space dentin (P<.001). Self-etching primers did not demonstrate regional differences in post space dentin bonding and dense resin tags were apparent. CONCLUSION: Data suggests that the self-etching primer system used in this study was unaffected by the morphological variations in the post space dentin compared to the single-bottle bonding agents. Dual polymerization did not improve the bond strength values of the bonding agents tested.