Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

PEEK and fiberglass intra-radicular posts: influence of resin cement and mechanical cycling on push-out bond strength

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the bond strength of four types of posts (pre-fabricated fiberglass post, fiberglass post anatomized with composite resin, milled fiberglass post, and milled polyetheretherketone (PEEK) post), and two types of resin cements (conventional and self-adhesive) by assessing immediate bond strength and post-mechanical aging at each root third.

Materials and methods

Bovine endodontically treated roots (16 groups, n = 8) were prepared and the posts were produced and luted; the specimens of aging groups were cycled (300,000 cycles under 50 N load at 1.2 Hz frequency); six slices of each root were obtained; push-out test was performed by using a universal testing machine (500 N load at 1 mm/min cross speed); fracture pattern was classified into five levels. The statistical analyses used were three-way ANOVA, Tukey’s test (for bond strength), and Fisher’s test (for fracture pattern) (α < 0.05).

Results

Differences were found between the cements for posts (conventional: p < 0.001; self-adhesive: p = 0.002), whereas no difference was found for root region (p = 0.941; p = 0.056, respectively); analysis of each root showed significant differences for cements (p < 0.001), posts (p < 0.001), and mechanical cycling (p = 0.001); in terms of double interaction, differences were found for posts and mechanical cycling (p = 0.005); no other interactions were observed (double or triple); the fracture pattern showed difference between the groups for both cements.

Conclusions

Milled PEEK posts seem to be a good clinical option, but they require improvement of CAD-CAM technology and advances towards their adhesion.

Clinical relevance

Milled posts are promising and can reduce clinical time for rehabilitation of extensively destroyed teeth.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ruschel GH, Gomes ÉA, Silva-Sousa YT, Pinelli RGP, Sousa-Neto MD, Pereira GKR, Spazzin AO (2018) Mechanical properties and superficial characterization of a milled CAD-CAM glass fiber post. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 82:187–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2018.03.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Assif D, Gorfil C (1994) Biomechanical considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 71(6):565–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(94)90438-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Leme AA, Coutinho M, Insaurralde AF, Scaffa PM, da Silva LM (2011) The influence of time and cement type on push-out bond strength of fiber posts to root dentin. Oper Dent 36(6):643–648. https://doi.org/10.2341/10-404-L

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cadenaro M, Maravic T, Comba A, Mazzoni A, Fanfoni L, Hilton T, Ferracane J, Breschi L (2019) The role of polymerization in adhesive dentistry. Dent Mater 35(1):e1–e22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.11.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Parčina Amižić I, Baraba A, Ionescu AC, Brambilla E, Van Ende A, Miletić I (2019) Bond Strength of Individually Formed and Prefabricated Fiber-reinforced Composite Posts. J Adhes Dent 21(6):557–565. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a43649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Taneja S, Kumar P, Gupta N, Khan R (2019) Influence of type of cement and their thickness on stress distribution at dentin-cement interface of computer-aided designed glass fiber post: A three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Conserv Dent 22(3):228–232. https://doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_457_18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Grandini S, Sapio S, Simonetti M (2003) Use of anatomic post and core for reconstructing an endodontically treated tooth: a case report. J Adhes Dent 5(3):243–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Eid R, Azzam K, Skienhe H, Ounsi H, Ferrari M, Salameh Z (2019) Influence of Adaptation and Adhesion on the Retention of Computer-aided Design/Computer-aided Manufacturing Glass Fiber Posts to Root Canal. J Contemp Dent Pract 20(9):1003–1008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Skirbutis G, Dzingutė A, Masiliūnaitė V, Šulcaitė G, Žilinskas J (2017) A review of PEEK polymer’s properties and its use in prosthodontics. Stomatologija 19(1):19–23

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Teixeira KN, Duque TM, Maia HP, Gonçalves T (2020) Fracture Resistance and Failure Mode of Custom-made Post-and-cores of Polyetheretherketone and Nano-ceramic Composite. Oper Dent 45(5):506–515. https://doi.org/10.2341/19-080-L

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Stawarczyk B, Thrun H, Eichberger M, Roos M, Edelhoff D, Schweiger J, Schmidlin PR (2015) Effect of different surface pretreatments and adhesives on the load-bearing capacity of veneered 3-unit PEEK FDPs. J Prosthet Dent 114(5):666–673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.06.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ibrahim RO, Al-Zahawi AR, Sabri LA (2020) Mechanical and thermal stress evaluation of PEEK prefabricated post with different head design in endodontically treated tooth: 3D-finite element analysis. Dent Mater J. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2020-053

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Stawarczyk B, Jordan P, Schmidlin PR, Roos M, Eichberger M, Gernet W, Keul C (2014) PEEK surface treatment effects on tensile bond strength to veneering resins. J Prosthet Dent 112(5):1278–1288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.05.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Schmidlin PR, Stawarczyk B, Wieland M, Attin T, Hämmerle CH, Fischer J (2010) Effect of different surface pre-treatments and luting materials on shear bond strength to PEEK. Dent Mater 26(6):553–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.02.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Silva NRD, Rodrigues MP, Bicalho AA, Soares PBF, Price RB, Soares CJ (2019) Effect of Resin Cement Mixing and Insertion Method into the Root Canal on Cement Porosity and Fiberglass Post Bond Strength. J Adhes Dent 21(1):37–46. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a41871

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tagger M, Tamse A, Katz A, Korzen BH (1984) Evaluation of the apical seal produced by a hybrid root canal filling method, combining lateral condensation and thermatic compaction. J Endod 10(7):299–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(84)80183-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lima JF, Lima AF, Humel MM, Paulillo LA, Marchi GM, Ferraz CC (2015) Influence of irrigation protocols on the bond strength of fiber posts cemented with a self-adhesive luting agent 24 hours after endodontic treatment. Gen Dent 63(4):22–26

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Freitas TL, Vitti RP, Miranda ME, Brandt WC (2019) Effect of Glass Fiber Post Adaptation on Push-Out Bond Strength to Root Dentin. Braz Dent J 30(4):350–355. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201902491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Macedo VC, Souza NA, Faria e Silva AL, Cotes C, da Silva C, Martinelli M, Kimpara ET (2013) Pullout bond strength of fiber posts luted to different depths and submitted to artificial aging. Oper Dent 38(4):E1-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Silva GR, Santos-Filho PC, Simamoto-Júnior PC, Martins LR, Mota AS, Soares CJ (2011) Effect of post type and restorative techniques on the strain and fracture resistance of flared incisor roots. Braz Dent J 22(3):230–237. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-64402011000300009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Silva RA, Coutinho M, Cardozo PI, Silva LA, Zorzatto JR (2011) Conventional dual-cure versus self-adhesive resin cements in dentin bond integrity. J Appl Oral Sci 19(4):355–362. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-77572011005000010

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Skupien JA, Sarkis-Onofre R, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Pereira-Cenci T (2015) A systematic review of factors associated with the retention of glass fiber posts. Braz Oral Res 29:S1806-83242015000100400. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0074

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lung CY, Matinlinna JP (2012) Aspects of silane coupling agents and surface conditioning in dentistry: an overview. Dent Mater 28(5):467–477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.02.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Manso AP, Carvalho RM (2017) Dental Cements for Luting and Bonding Restorations: Self-Adhesive Resin Cements. Dent Clin North Am 61(4):821–834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2017.06.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Mergulhão VA, de Mendonça LS, de Albuquerque MS, Braz R (2019) Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Maxillary Premolars Restored with Different Methods. Oper Dent 44(1):E1–E11. https://doi.org/10.2341/17-262-L

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Soejima H, Takemoto S, Hattori M, Yoshinari M, Kawada E, Oda Y (2013) Effect of adhesive system on retention in posts comprising fiber post and core resin. Dent Mater J 32(4):659–666. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2013-078

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zicari F, De Munck J, Scotti R, Naert I, Van Meerbeek B (2012) Factors affecting the cement-post interface. Dent Mater 28(3):287–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.11.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Başaran G, Göncü Başaran E, Ayna E, Değer Y, Ayna B, Tuncer MC (2019) Microtensile bond strength of root canal dentin treated with adhesive and fiber-reinforced post systems. Braz Oral Res 33:e027. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2019.vol33.0027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Goracci C, Fabianelli A, Sadek FT, Papacchini F, Tay FR, Ferrari M (2005) The contribution of friction to the dislocation resistance of bonded fiber posts. J Endod 31(8):608–612. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.don.0000153841.23594.91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by The Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) under grant number 310089/2016–6.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Restorative Dentistry, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Av. Limeira, 901, Bairro Areão13.414-093, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil

    Lara Christie Monteiro, Isabela Guerra Gontijo, Giselle Maria Marchi, Débora Alves Nunes Leite Lima & Flávio Henrique Baggio Aguiar

  2. Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas, Av. Limeira, 901, Bairro Areão13.414-093, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil

    Vanessa Gallego Arias Pecorari

Authors
  1. Lara Christie Monteiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vanessa Gallego Arias Pecorari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Isabela Guerra Gontijo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Giselle Maria Marchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Débora Alves Nunes Leite Lima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Flávio Henrique Baggio Aguiar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lara Christie Monteiro.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not necessary for this kind of research.

Informed consent

Not necessary for this kind of research.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Monteiro, L.C., Pecorari, V.G.A., Gontijo, I.G. et al. PEEK and fiberglass intra-radicular posts: influence of resin cement and mechanical cycling on push-out bond strength. Clin Oral Invest 26, 6907–6916 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04645-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04645-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation