EFFECT OF IRRIGATION AGENTS, ADHESIVE SYSTEM AND BOND STRENGTH OF COMPOSITE POST
Evaluate the effect of irrigation agents, adhesive system and bond strength of composite post with the dentin. For this in vitro study, 48 single-rooted teeth were used, (incisions, second premolars with one root) extracted for orthodontic and periodontal reasons. The teeth were then divided into 2 groups of 24 teeth depending on the irrigation agent used, and each group was divided into 2 subgroups of 24 teeth depending on the cementation agent. After application of the composite post to the root canal and restoration, all samples were prepared in molds to test the strength of the composite post with the dentin. For this study, a descriptive statistical analysis was used, which was implemented on the obtained results, and was made in a statistical package Excel ANOVA 2016, where the test strength was done with Push-out testing. The results obtained were in favour of the group where 2.5% sodium hypochlorite and 17% EDTA were used as irrigants, where the technique of complete etching with 37% orthophosphoric acid was used, Excite adhesive (Ivoclar Vivadent Inc., Schaan, Liechtenstein) and dual-polymerizing cement Variolink II (Ivoclar Vivadent Inc., Schaan, Liechtenstein) the pressure, i.e. the bond strength obtained by push-out testing was the highest and was 2,185 MPa, and the weakest bond was obtained when we used only 2.5% sodium hypochlorite as an irrigant using Excite self-etching adhesive and SpeedCEM™ dual-polymerizing cement. From the results obtained from this study we can conclude that the bond between the composite post and the dentin is strongest with the application of the irrigants 2.5% sodium hypochlorite and 17% EDTA and the technique of complete etching with orthophosphoric acid in combination with Excite self-etching adhesive and SpeedCEM™ dual-polymerizing cement.
Key words: endodontic treatment, irrigants, dual-polymerizing cements, composite post
2. Hulsmann M, Rummelin C, Schafers F. Root canal cleanliness after preparation with different endodontic
handpieces and hand instruments: a comparative SEM investigation. Journal of Endodontics. 1997; 5: 301-6.
3. Santos JN: Influência de irrigantes endodônticos na resistência de união de um adesivo autocondicionante à
dentina da câmara pulpar. [dissertation]. Piracicaba: Universidade Estadual de Campinas; 2005.
4. Sutalo J. Kompozitni materijali u stomatologiji. Zagreb: Graficki Zavod Hrvatske; 1988.
5. Perdigão J, Denehy GE, Swift JE. Effects of chlorhexidine on dentin surfaces and shear bond strengths. Am J
Dent. 1994 Apr;7(2):81-4
6. Nakabayashi N, Sami Y. Bonding to intact dentin. J Dent Res.1996 Sep;75:1706-15.
7. Bocangel JS, Kraul AOE, Vargas AG, Demarco FF, Matson E. Influence of disinfectant solutions on the tensile
bond strength of a fourth-generation dentin bonding agent. Pesq Odontol Bras. 2000;14(2):107-11
8. Meiers JC, Shook LW. Effect of disinfectants on the bond strength of composite to dentin. Am J Dent. 1996
9. Reeh ES, Messer HH Schwartz RS, Robbins JW. Post placement and restoration of endodontically treated teeth:
a literature review. J Endod. 2004; 30: 289-301
10. Ahlquist M., Henningsson O., Hultenby K. & Ohlin J. The effectiveness of manual and rotary techniques in the
cleaning of root canals: a scanning electron microscopy study. International Endodontic Journal. 2001; 34:
11. Schafer E., Lohmann D. Efficiency of rotary nickel-titanium Flex Master instruments compared with stainless
steel hand Kflexofile - Part 2. Cleaning effectiveness and instrumentation results in severely curved root
canals of extracted teeth. International Endodontic Journal; 2002: 35: 514-521
12. Huang TJ, Schilder H, Nathanson D Effects of moisture content and endodontic treatment on some
mechanical properties of human dentin. J Endod 1992; 18:209–215
13. Araújo MAJ, Rode SM, Villela LC, et al. Smear layer removal: qualitative scanning electron microscopy study.
Rev Odonto Univ São Paulo. 1998;12(2):99-104.
14. Cheung W. A review of the management of endodontically treated teeth. Post, core and the final restoration. J
Am Dent Assoc. 2005; 136: 611-9
15. Frankenberger R, Franklin RT. Self-etch vs etch-and-rinse adhesives: effect of thermo-mechanical fatigue
loading on marginal quality of bonded resin composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2005; 21:397-412.
16. Best SM, Porter AE, Thian ES, Huang J, Bioceramics: past, present and for the future. J Eur Ceram Soc 2008
17. Morris MD, Lee KW, Agee KA, et al: Effects of sodium hypochlorite and Rc-prep on bond strengths of resin
cement to endodontic surfaces. J Endod 2001; 27(12):753
18. Morris, D. L, Effect of sodium hypochlorite on dentin bonding in primary teeth, Pub Med, 2004, available at:
19. Zorba et al., Comparation of microleakage on different restorative materials at class II cavities: an invitro
study, |Abstracts Volime \|BaSS 2015, pp.506
20. Ari et al., Effect of different surface treatments on the push-out bond strength of fiber post to root canal
dentin, Research Gate Net, 2009 достапно на:
21. Goracci et al., Bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to tooth structure, PMC US International Library
of Medicine, National Institute of Health, 2015, достапно на: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4459118/
22. Radovic et al., Effect of different irrigations on the bond strength of self-adhesive resin cement to root dentin,
Research Gate Net, 2018
23. Van Meerbebeek, Clinical performance of adhe-sives, Research Gate Net, 1998, :