These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Rigidity and retention of ceramic root canal posts.
    Author: Purton DG, Love RM, Chandler NP.
    Journal: Oper Dent; 2000; 25(3):223-7. PubMed ID: 11203820.
    Abstract:
    Ceramic root-canal posts offer potential advantages over other types with respect to aesthetics and biocompatibility. Any post must be sufficiently rigid and retentive to withstand functional forces. Ceraposts (1.2 mm coronal diameter, ceramic, tapering, smooth posts) and Paraposts (1.25 mm, stainless-steel, parallel, serrated posts) were tested for rigidity by means of a three-point bending test. To test retention in roots, ceramic posts were cemented using one of three protocols: (1) glass-ionomer cement, (2) silane coupling agent and resin cement, or (3) sandblasted post surface, silane coupling agent, and resin cement. Stainless-steel posts were cemented with resin. The tensile force required to dislodge the posts, following four weeks of storage in water, was recorded. Data were compared using Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney U analysis. Ceraposts were significantly more rigid than Paraposts (p < 0.001). Paraposts cemented with resin were significantly more strongly retained than Ceraposts following any cementation protocol (p < 0.001). Retention of the ceramic posts was significantly greater with a silane coupling agent and resin cement than with glass-ionomer cement (p < 0.001). Sandblasting the ceramic posts produced variable results and needs further investigation before it could be recommended.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]