Factors affecting on bond strength of glass fiber post cemented with different resin cements to root canal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Luting materials provides the retention of endodontic post. However, the failures of endodontic posts predominantly occurred are the losses of retention. Thus, the alternating use to remove the smear layer, open the dentine tubules, and/or etch the inter-tubular dentine can be provided by EDTA. This study was performed to evaluate effect of EDTA on bond strength of glass fiber post cemented with different resin cements to root canal. Fifty bovine incisors were selected and the crowns were removed to obtain a remaining 14-mm-height root. The roots were randomly distributed into five groups: GI: RelyX™ ARC/LED; GII: RelyX™ U100/LED; GIII EDTA/RelyX™ U100/LED; GIV: Multilink™; and GV: EDTA/Multlink™. After endodontic treatment, the post space was prepared with the drills designated for the quartz-coated-carbon-fiber post Aestheti-Post®. Before application of resin cements, root canals were irrigated with 17% EDTA (GIII and GV) during 1 min, rinsed with distilled water and dried using paper points. The light-cured materials were light-activated with UltraLume LED 5 (Ultradent, South Jordan, Utah) with power density of 1315 mW/cm 2 . Specimens were perpendicularly sectioned into approximately 1 mm thick sections and the stubs were performed on Universal Testing Machine. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s post-hoc tests showed significant statistical different between RelyX™ ARC (GI) and RelyX™ U100 independent of the pre-treatment (GII to GIII) ( P < 0.05). The Multlink™ showed between RelyX™ ARC and RelyX™ U100 (GI to GIII; GII to GV) ( P < 0.05). The ANOVA showed significant statistical similar ( P > 0.05) to all resin cements between the Cervical to Apical regions (GI to GV). The use of 17% EDTA showed no difference significant between the resin cements evaluated (GII to GIII; GIV to GV). Within the limitations of the current study, it can be concluded that the use of EDTA did not provide efficiency on bond strength. The RelyX™ ARC showed higher bond strength values than RelyX™ U100.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".