الفهرس | Only 14 pages are availabe for public view |
Abstract This study was carried out to evaluate and compare the effects of surface treatment of titanium post and the surface treatment of root canal on the retentivity of the post. Crowns of sixty human maxillary central incisors were removed at the cement-enamel junction and the roots were endodontically treated with a crown down technique. Each root was embedded in autopolymerizing resin. After post space preparation, five mm remaining root canal filling was left in place to provide an adequate apical seal. These samples were endodontically treated then prepared to receive titanium posts. These samples were divided into 3 groups (20 samples each) according to the type of post surface treatment: • No treatment, sandblasting or silicoating. Then each group was subdivided into 2 subgroups (10 samples each) according to the type of root canal surface treatment: • Non etched or etched. Finally each subgroup was further divided into 2 classes (5 samples each) according to the type of resin cement: • Multilink N or RelyX Unicem. The samples were subjected to a tensile strength test by testing machine (Model LRX-plus; Lloyd Instruments Ltd., Fareham, UK) with a loadcell of 5-kN and data were recorded using computer software (Nexygen-MT; Lloyd Instruments) and loaded in tension until failure. The results were recorded, tabulated & statistically analyzed. The results showed that no significant difference between the retention of non treated silanized titanium posts, silicacoated silanized titanium posts or sandblasted silanized titanium posts. In addition, the results showed, no significant difference between the retention of etched and non etched post spaces groups except for group[Ti C etch R] which doubled the mean retentive value versus group[Ti C non R]. At the same time, there was significant difference between the 2 resin cement groups as Multilink N groups showed high mean retentive values than RelyX Unicem groups. |