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: Retention strengths of five luting cements on prefabricated dowels after root canal obturation with a zinc oxide/eugenol sealer: 1. Dowel space preparation/cementation at one week after obturation. Author: Hagge MS, Wong RD, Lindemuth JS. Journal: J Prosthodont; 2002 Sep; 11(3):168-75. PubMed ID: 12237797. Abstract: PURPOSE: This investigation examined the effect of 5 different cements on the retention strength of prefabricated endodontic dowels placed into root canals previously obturated with gutta percha and a zinc oxide/eugenol (ZOE) sealer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-six single-rooted teeth were decoronated, filed, cleaned, sequentially shaped, and divided into 6 groups of 16 specimens each. Five of the groups were then obturated with gutta percha and a ZOE sealer. One group was not obturated and served as the control group. Dowel space preparation and dowel cementation for all groups were completed 1 week later. Ten-mm deep dowel spaces were prepared using size 6 Gates Glidden drills. Size 5 Paraposts were then cemented with 5 different cements: Panavia 21 for group 1 (unobturated controls) and group 2; Ketac-Cem glass ionomer for group 3; Fleck's zinc phosphate for group 4; Parapost (composite) Cement for group 5; and C&B Metabond 4-META for group 6. After 48 hours, the dowels were removed using a universal testing machine in tensile mode at 1 mm min(-1). RESULTS: The following results were found (all values in kg): group 1 (controls; Panavia 21) mean = 61.81, 95% CI = +/-8.65; group 2 (Panavia 21), mean=43.15, 95% CI = +/-7.81; group 3 (Ketac-Cem), mean =34.45, 95% CI = +/-4.93; group 4 (zinc phosphate), mean = 25.07, 95% CI = +/-5.03; group 5 (Parapost Cement), mean = 24.99, 95% CI = +/-5.35. None of the group 6 (C&B Metabond) specimens developed measurable bond strengths, so this group was excluded from parametric statistical analyses. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant effect of group; pairwise multiple comparison procedures (Tukey test) showed that group 1 (controls) had significantly greater retention than all other groups (p <0.001); group 2 (Panavia 21) had significantly greater retention than groups 4 (zinc phosphate) and 5 (Parapost cement) (p <0.001). None of the other pairwise comparisons were statistically different. CONCLUSION: Paraposts cemented with Panavia 21 in unobturated root canals exhibited significantly higher retention than Paraposts luted with Panavia 21 and 4 different cements into dowel spaces prepared 1 week after obturation with gutta percha/ZOE sealer (p <0.001). Among the obturated groups, Panavia 21 cement (group 2) demonstrated significantly greater retention of Paraposts than zinc phosphate (group 4) and Parapost composite (group 5) cements (p <0.001). Ketac-Cem glass ionomer cement (group 3) had intermediate retention values that were not statistically different than those of groups 2, 4, and 5 (p >0.05). The 4-META cement, C&B Metabond, failed to polymerize.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]