Evaluation of Retention for copy post in Endodontically treated teeth cemented by different types of cement for over-denture abutments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54361/Keywords:
Over-denture, Metal Copy Post, Luting cement, Retention testAbstract
Objective: the aim of this study was to evaluate the retention of the copy post in endodontically treated teeth cemented by three different types of cement for over-denture abutments: An in-vitro study. Method: nine recently extracted human mandibular canines and premolars were endodontically treated and randomly divided into three groups of three specimens each. Group I: the copy posts were cemented by zinc phosphate cement (ZPC), Group II: the copy posts were cemented by Fuji cement (FC) and Group III: the copy posts cemented by core x composite cement (CXFC). Universal Testing Machine was used for retention test of copy posts. The data was collected and statistically analyzed by one way ANOVA with Tukey’s post hoc multiple comparison tests. Result: By compression of retentive forces between different types of cement, The highest retentive value was shown in combination of the copy post with zinc phosphate cement with p value less than 0.05 (p =0.03), followed by fuji cement while the core X flow cement showed The lowest retentive value. Conclusion: within the limitation of the present study, the selection of proper cement is critical for success and survival of the core post system to support over-denture, and the ZPC showed the highest retentive value in combine with core post in compare with FC and CX FC.
Downloads
References
Bansal S, Aras M, Chitre V: Tooth supported overdenture retained with custom Attachments: A Case Report. J Ind Prosth Dent Soc. 2014; 141: 283-6.
Jain D, Hegde V, Aparna I, Dhanasekar B. Overdenture with accesspost system: A clinical report. J Ind Dent Res. 2011;22:359
Rahn AO, Heartwell CM. Textbook of complete dentures. Elseviers, 5th ed, 2002;493-6
Guttal SS, Tavargeri AK, Nadiger RK, Thakur SL. Use of an Implant O-Ring attachment for the Tooth supported mandibular overdenture: A Clinical Report. J EuroDent. 2011; 5: 331
Alsamadani KH, Abdaziz el-SM, Gad el- S. Influence of different restorative techniques on the strength of endodontically treated weakened roots. J Int Dent. 2012;2012: 343-712.
Ingle JI, Bakland LK. Endodontics. London: Williams and Wikins, 4th ed , 1994: 884
Ricketts DN, Tait CM, Higgins AJ. Post and core systems, refinements to tooth preparation and cementation. J Bri Dent. 2005; 198 :533 – 41.
Kumar L, Jurel S, Mishra N, Yadav A, Gupta D. Split post core for grossly decayed multirooted teeth.case report. J Int Med Dent Sci 2013; 2: 224-8
Morgano SM, Brackett SE. Foundation restorations in fixed prosthodontics: current knowledge and future needs. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 82: 643-57.
Stockton L. Factors affecting retention of post systems: a Factors affecting retention of post systems: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent.199981: 380- 385.4.
Grewal PS, Grewal KP, Grover D A Literature Review of Different Criterias for Selecting and Cementing a post: a review. 2011; 3(4): 321-4.
Yun MJ, Jeon YC, Jeong CM, Huh JB. Comparison of the fit of cast gold crowns fabricated from the digital and the conventional impression techniques. J Adv Prosthet Dent. 2017 9: 1-13
Reddy M, Reddy V, Basappa N. Acomparative study of retentive strengths of zinc phosphate, poly carboxylate and glass ionomer cements with stainless steel crowns-An in vitro study. J Indi Society Pedodontics and Preventive Dent, 2010; 28 :245-50.
Fakiha Z, Al-Aujan A, Al-Shamrani S. Retention of cast posts cemented with zinc phosphate cement using different cementing techniques. J Am Prosthet Dent, 2001;10:37-41
Yamashita J, Takakuda K, Shiozawa I, Nagasawa M, & Miyairi H .Fatigue behavior of the zinc-phosphate cement layer .Int J Prosthet Dent,2000; 13:321- 26.
Hill EE. Dental cements for definitive luting: a review and practical clinical considerations. Dent clin North Am, 2007;51 :643-51:643-58.
Kim YK, Kim SK, Kim KH, Kwon TY. Degree of conversion of dual-cured resin cement light-cured through three fibre posts within human root canals: an ex vivo study. Int Endod J, 2009;42:667-74
Abbo B, Razzoog M, Vivas J, Sierraalta M. Resistance to dislodgment of zirconia copings cemented onto titanium abutments of different heights J Prosthet Dent, 2008; 99: 25-34.
Cohen B, Pagnillo M, Newman I, Musikant B, Deutsch A. Retention of three endodontic posts cemented with five dental cements. J Prosthet Dent, 1998; 79:520-5.
Marshall G, Marshall S, Kinney J, Balooch M . The dentin substrate: Structure and properties related to bonding. J Dent, 1997; 25 :441-58.
Ghazy MH, Aboumadina MM, Mahmoud SH. Retentiveness of Metal Coping Luted to Teeth of Uremic Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis Using Five Different Luting Cements. J Oper Dent, 2014, 39-3
Elsayed M, El-Mowafy O, Fenton A. Retention of Overdenture Posts Cemented with Self-Adhesive Resin Cements. J Int Prosthet Dent, 2009; 22: 287–28
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Sarra Abdulhamid ben hamida, Mohamed Ali El Maroush, Wehad Mukhtar Mustfa, Suleiman Mohamed Esayah (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Open Access Policy
Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR).is an open journal, therefore there are no fees required for downloading any publication from the journal website by authors, readers, and institution.
The journal applies the license of CC BY (a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license). This license allows authors to keep ownership f the copyright of their papers. But this license permits any user to download , print out, extract, reuse, archive, and distribute the article, so long as appropriate credit is given to the authors and the source of the work.
The license ensures that the article will be available as widely as possible and that the article can be included in any scientific archive.
Editorial Policy
The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for Libyan journal of medical Research (LJMR). It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editorial, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
Any manuscript or substantial parts of it, submitted to the journal must not be under consideration by any other journal. In general, the manuscript should not have already been published in any journal or other citable form, although it may have been deposited on a preprint server. Authors are required to ensure that no material submitted as part of a manuscript infringes existing copyrights, or the rights of a third party.
Authorship Policy
The manuscript authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution and intellectual input to the research submitted to the journal, including design, performance, interpretation of the reported study, and writing the manuscript. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the manuscript but without intellectual input should only be recognized in the acknowledgements section of the manuscript. Also, one of the authors should be selected as the corresponding author to communicate with the journal and approve the final version of the manuscript for publication in the LJMR.
Peer-review Policy
- All the manuscripts submitted to LJMR will be subjected to the double-blinded peer-review process;
- The manuscript will be reviewed by two suitable experts in the respective subject area.
- Reports of all the reviewers will be considered while deciding on acceptance/revision or rejection of a manuscript.
- Editor-In-Chief will make the final decision, based on the reviewer’s comments.
- Editor-In-Chief can ask one or more advisory board members for their suggestions upon a manuscript, before making the final decision.
- Associate editor and review editors provide administrative support to maintain the integrity of the peer-review process.
- In case, authors challenge the editor’s negative decision with suitable arguments, the manuscript can be sent to one more reviewer and the final decision will be made based upon his recommendations.
