James Brichko1, Michael F Burrow1, Peter Parashos2. 1. Melbourne Dental School, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. Melbourne Dental School, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: parashos@unimelb.edu.au.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There is limited literature on the impact of testing variables on the push-out bond test (POBT). This review identified designs of the POBT used in the endodontic literature and aimed to determine which experimental variables may influence the push-out bond strength (POBS). METHODS: A systematic review based on PRISMA guidelines was performed by searching the PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library databases using terms including push-out and dislocation resistance and descriptions of endodontic materials. Test variables assessed included method of root preparation, timing of sectioning compared with filling, thickness, diameter and taper of sections, and plunger size and velocity. The POBS of 3 common materials (gutta-percha and AH Plus, mineral trioxide aggregate, and Biodentine) were collected from investigations, and a comparison was attempted. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-three studies assessed the POBS of root-filling materials, 68 assessed root repair cements/root-end filling materials, and 16 assessed orifice barrier materials other than mineral trioxide aggregate. There was significant variation in all of the assessed variables, resulting in a large range of reported values for the POBS of the various materials. Because of this heterogeneity in study design, no further statistical analysis of the impact of the test variables on POBS was possible. CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable variation in the POBT design used in endodontic research. Greater standardization is required for future research as well as accurate reporting for all test variables to assess the impact of specific design variables on POBS.
INTRODUCTION: There is limited literature on the impact of testing variables on the push-out bond test (POBT). This review identified designs of the POBT used in the endodontic literature and aimed to determine which experimental variables may influence the push-out bond strength (POBS). METHODS: A systematic review based on PRISMA guidelines was performed by searching the PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library databases using terms including push-out and dislocation resistance and descriptions of endodontic materials. Test variables assessed included method of root preparation, timing of sectioning compared with filling, thickness, diameter and taper of sections, and plunger size and velocity. The POBS of 3 common materials (gutta-percha and AH Plus, mineral trioxide aggregate, and Biodentine) were collected from investigations, and a comparison was attempted. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-three studies assessed the POBS of root-filling materials, 68 assessed root repair cements/root-end filling materials, and 16 assessed orifice barrier materials other than mineral trioxide aggregate. There was significant variation in all of the assessed variables, resulting in a large range of reported values for the POBS of the various materials. Because of this heterogeneity in study design, no further statistical analysis of the impact of the test variables on POBS was possible. CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable variation in the POBT design used in endodontic research. Greater standardization is required for future research as well as accurate reporting for all test variables to assess the impact of specific design variables on POBS.
Authors: Elena Rebolloso de Barrio; Juan José Pérez-Higueras; Ernesto García-Barbero; Lucía Gancedo-Caravia Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2021-11-19 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: Maykely Naara Morais Rodrigues; Kely Firmino Bruno; Ana Helena Gonçalves de Alencar; Julyana Dumas Santos Silva; Patrícia Correia de Siqueira; Daniel de Almeida Decurcio; Carlos Estrela Journal: Restor Dent Endod Date: 2021-11-09
Authors: David Donnermeyer; Lena Göbell; Sebastian Bürklein; Till Dammaschke; Edgar Schäfer Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2019-09-05 Impact factor: 3.623