Comparative study of the different surface conditions on the bending properties and topographic analysis of the fiberglass posts

Authors

  • Myriam Rosmery Ortega Condori Faculty of Dentistry, Catholic University of Santa María. Arequipa, Peru.
  • Lourdes Concepción Llerena Pérez Faculty of Dentistry, Catholic University of Santa María. Arequipa, Peru.
  • Roberto Antonio León Manco Faculty of Stomatology, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia. Lima, Peru.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20453/reh.v32i4.4378

Keywords:

Post and core technique, hydrofluoric acid, hydrogen peroxide, aluminun oxide

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the bending and topography properties of surface treated fiber posts. Material and Methods: Experimental, In vitro. The samples were divided into two groups, the flexibility of 40 fiberglass posts from 2 commercial houses was evaluated for each conditioning procedure P1: FGM White Post DC; P2: MAQUIRA Fiber Post. The conditioning techniques were: T1: control T2: Hydrofluoric Acid 10% 15 seconds T3: Hydrogen Peroxide 24% 60 seconds T4: aluminum oxide 50 µm and were subjected to the universal testing machine, for the bending test of 3 points. The topographic surface of the fiberglass posts was observed using a scanning electron microscope. Results: The deflection (mm) showed a significant difference comparing the control groups and the conditioned groups with an average maximum value of 0.59mm ±0.04 and a minimum value of 0.51mm ±0.06. In the maximum force (N), a significant difference was observed when comparing the control groups and the conditioned groups, with a maximum value of 133.68 ±11.42 N and a minimum value of 103.48 ±17.79 N. Conclusions: No adverse effects on bending properties were found for both groups of fiberglass posts after surface conditioning with the different protocols.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Goracci C, Ferrari M. Current perspectives on post systems: a literature review. Aust Dent J. 2011; 56:77–83.

Zicari F, De Munck J, Scotti R, Naert I, Van Meerbeek B. Factors affecting the cement-post interface. Dent Mater J. 2012; 28: 287-297.

Aksornmuang J, Chuenarrom C, Chittithaworn N. Effects of various etching protocols on the flexural properties and surface topography of fiber reinforced composite dental posts. Dent Mater J. 2017;36(5):614-621. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2016-290

Murillo de Sousa M, Cavalcanto E, Vinicius P, Faria e Silva A, Soares C, Marcondes L. Fiber post etching with hydrogen peroxide effect of concentration and application time. J Endod. 2011; 37:398–402

Mazzitelli C, Ferrari M, Toledano M, et al. Surface roughness analysis of fiber post conditioning processes. J Dent Res. 2008;87:186–90

Archana C, Raju S, Yadhav S, et al. Effect of Surface pretreatment and thermal activation of silane coupling agent bond strength of fiber posts to resin cement. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019;20(11):1293-1296

Schmage P, Pinto E, Platzer U, Nergiz I. Influence of oversized dowel space preparation on the bond strengths of FRC posts. Oper Dent 2009; 34:93-101.

Braga NM, Souza-Gabriel AE, Messias DC, Rached-Junior FJ, Oliveira CF, Silva RG, et al. Flexural properties, morphology and bond strength of fiber- reinforced posts: influence of post pretreatment. Braz Dent J. 2012; 23:679-85.

Maroulakos G, Wanserski MW, Wanserski MM, et al. Effect of airborne-particle abrasion on 3-dimensional Surface roughness and characteristic failure load of fiber reinforced posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(3):461-469. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.07.007

Soares CJ, Santana FR, Pereira JC, Araujo TS, Menezes MS. Influence of airborne-particle abrasion on mechanical properties and bond strength of carbon/epoxy and glass/bis-GMA-fiber-reinforced resin posts. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 99:444–54

Published

2022-12-15

How to Cite

1.
Ortega Condori MR, Llerena Pérez LC, León Manco RA. Comparative study of the different surface conditions on the bending properties and topographic analysis of the fiberglass posts. Rev Estomatol Herediana [Internet]. 2022 Dec. 15 [cited 2024 Dec. 22];32(4):371-80. Available from: http://44.198.254.164/index.php/REH/article/view/4378