Stabilität eines neuen Stiftsystems: Glasfaserstift mit und ohne Tophead im Vergleich

Zusammenfassung

Ziel der In-vitro-Studie war es, festzustellen, ob sich die Haftkräfte und Versagensmechanismen des Glasfaserstifts FiberMaster (NTI) durch Kombination mittels Tophead verändern. Als Referenz wurden 2 weitere Glasfaserstifte untersucht. Hierbei handelte es sich um den DT LIGHT- (VDW) sowie den Rebilda Post-Stift (VOCO). Getestet wurden Biegefestigkeit und Elastizitätsmodul der Stifte nach 1 Tag Lagerung in destilliertem Wasser sowie nach künstlicher Alterung. Außerdem wurde die Bruchfestigkeit und Durchbiegung der Stifte nach Insertion in einer Haltevorrichtung sowie nach adhäsiver Befestigung in extrahierten humanen Versuchszähnen untersucht. Rasterelektronenmikroskopische Untersuchungen zeigen die Querschnitte sowie Bruchflächen der frakturierten Glasfaserstifte.

Abstract

The aim of the in vitro study was to determine whether the adhesive forces and failure mechanisms of the fiber-glass post FiberMaster (NTI) change when combined with Tophead. As a reference, two further fiber-glass posts were investigated. These were the DT LIGHT post (VDW) and the Rebilda Post post (VOCO). The flexural strength and modulus of elasticity of the posts were tested after one day of storage in distilled water and after artificial ageing. In addition, the breaking strength and deflection of the posts after insertion in a holding device and after adhesive cementation in extracted human test teeth were investigated. Scanning electron microscopic examinations show the cross-sections and fracture surfaces of the fractured fiber-glass posts.

Schlüsselwörter

Glasfaserstifte - Elastizitätsmodul - Biegefestigkeit - Bruchfestigkeit - Durchbiegung - adhäsive Befestigung - Wurzelfrakturen

Key words

fiber-glass posts - modulus of elasticity - flexural strength - fracture strength - deflection - adhesive cementation - root fractures

• Literatur

• 1 Betke H, Ziebolz D, Rien C. et al. Influence of disinfectants on dentin bond strength of different adhesive systems. Oper Dent 2005; 30: 250-256
• 2 Kwiatkowski S, Geller W. A preliminary consideration of the glass-ceramic dowel post and core. Int J Prosthodont 1989; 2: 51-55
• 3 Taubock TT, Oberlin H, Buchalla W. et al. Comparing the effectiveness of self-curing and light curing in polymerization of dual-cured core buildup materials. J Am Dent Assoc 2011; 142: 950-956
• 4 Zalkind M, Hochman N. Esthetic considerations in restoring endodontically treated teeth with posts and cores. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79: 702-705
• 5 Rosentritt M, Furer C, Behr M. et al. Comparison of in vitro fracture strength of metallic and tooth-coloured posts and cores. J Oral Rehabil 2000; 27: 595-601
• 6 Schwartz RS, Robbins JW. Post placement and restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a literature review. J Endod 2004; 30: 289-301
• 7 Barjau-Escribano A, Sancho-Bru JL, Forner-Navarro L. et al. Influence of prefabricated post material on restored teeth: fracture strength and stress distribution. Oper Dent 2006; 31: 47-54
• 8 Lanza A, Aversa R, Rengo S. et al. 3D FEA of cemented steel, glass and carbon posts in a maxillary incisor. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 709-715
• 9 Bitter K, Kielbassa AM. Post-endodontic restorations with adhesively luted fiber-reinforced composite post systems: a review. Am J Dent 2007; 20: 353-360
• 10 Cormier CJ, Burns DR, Moon P. In vitro comparison of the fracture resistance and failure mode of fiber, ceramic, and conventional post systems at various stages of restoration. J Prosthodont 2001; 10: 26-36
• 11 Fokkinga WA, Kreulen CM, Vallittu PK. et al. A structured analysis of in vitro failure loads and failure modes of fiber, metal, and ceramic post-and-core systems. Int J Prosthodont 2004; 17: 476-482
• 12 Salameh Z, Sorrentino R, Papacchini F. et al. Fracture resistance and failure patterns of endodontically treated mandibular molars restored using resin composite with or without translucent glass fiber posts. J Endod 2006; 32: 752-755
• 13 Bitter K, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM. Effects of pretreatment and thermocycling on bond strength of resin core materials to various fiber-reinforced composite posts. J Adhes Dent 2008; 10: 481-489
• 14 Ferrari M, Cagidiaco MC, Goracci C. et al. Long-term retrospective study of the clinical performance of fiber posts. Am J Dent 2007; 20: 287-291
• 15 Rasimick BJ, Wan J, Musikant BL. et al. A review of failure modes in teeth restored with adhesively luted endodontic dowels. J Prosthodont 2010; 19: 639-646
• 16 Akkayan B, Gulmez T. Resistance to fracture of endodontically treated teeth restored with different post systems. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 87: 431-437
• 17 Naumann M, Blankenstein F, Kiessling S. et al. Risk factors for failure of glass fiber-reinforced composite post restorations: a prospective observational clinical study. Eur J Oral Sci 2005; 113: 519-524
• 18 Salameh Z, Sorrentino R, Ounsi HF. et al. The effect of different full-coverage crown systems on fracture resistance and failure pattern of endodontically treated maxillary incisors restored with and without glass fiber posts. J Endod 2008; 34: 842-846
• 19 Ferrari M, Scotti R. Fiber posts. Characteristics and clinical applications. Mailand: Masson SPA; 2002
• 20 Lassila LV, Tanner J, Le Bell AM. et al. Flexural properties of fiber reinforced root canal posts. Dent Mater 2004; 20: 29-36
• 21 Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A. Finite element analysis of stresses in endodontically treated, dowel-restored teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 94: 321-329
• 22 Dieng Sarr FY, Sall OH, Faye B. et al. Performance and Compatibility of Self Polymerizing Prime and Bond NT Adhesive and the Composite LuxaCore. Odontostomatol Trop 2006; 29: 30-34
• 23 Cagidiaco MC, Goracci C, Garcia-Godoy F. et al. Clinical studies of fiber posts: a literature review. Int J Prosthodont 2008; 21: 328-336
• 24 Sterzenbach G, Franke A, Naumann M. Rigid versus flexible dentine-like endodontic posts-clinical testing of a biomechanical concept: seven-year results of a randomized controlled clinical pilot trial on endodontically treated abutment teeth with severe hard tissue loss. J Endod 2012; 38: 1557-1563
• 25 Abbate MF, Tjan AH, Fox WM. Comparison of the marginal fit of various ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 61: 527-531
• 26 Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent 1999; 27: 89-99
• 27 de Rijk WG. Removal of fiber posts from endodontically treated teeth. Am J Dent 2000; 13 (Spec No): 19B-21B
• 28 Sakkal S. Carbon-fiber post removal technique. Compend Contin Educ Dent Suppl 1996; (20) 86
• 29 Naumann M, Preuss A, Frankenberger R. Reinforcement effect of adhesively luted fiber reinforced composite versus titanium posts. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 138-144
• 30 Rosentritt M, Naumann M, Hahnel S. et al. Evaluation of tooth analogs and type restoration on the fracture resistance of post and core restored incisors. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2009; 91: 272-276
• 31 Howe CA, McKendry DJ. Effect of endodontic access preparation on resistance to crown-root fracture. J Am Dent Assoc 1990; 121: 712-715
• 32 King PA, Setchell DJ. An in vitro evaluation of a prototype CFRC prefabricated post developed for the restoration of pulpless teeth. J Oral Rehabil 1990; 17: 599-609
• 33 Goldberg AJ, Burstone CJ. The use of continuous fiber reinforcement in dentistry. Dent Mater 1992; 8: 197-202
• 34 Galhano GA, Valandro LF, de Melo RM. et al. Evaluation of the flexural strength of carbon fiber-, quartz fiber-, and glass fiber-based posts. J Endod 2005; 31: 209-211
• 35 Solnit GS. The effect of methyl methacrylate reinforcement with silane-treated and untreated glass fibers. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 66: 310-314