Comparative Evaluation of Push-Out Bond Strength of Glass Fiber Posts and Carbon Fiber Posts in Root Canals Treated With Calcium Hydroxide–Based, Resin-Based, and Bioceramic-Based Root Canal Sealers: Protocol for an In Vitro Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For root canal procedures to be successful, adequate bond strength between endodontic sealer and post material is necessary. For postendodontic restorations, glass fiber posts and carbon fiber posts are frequently used. Depending on the type of root canal sealer used, such posts may work differently. The chemical composition and characteristics of calcium hydroxide-based, resin-based, and bioceramic-based sealers vary, which may have an impact on the posts' binding strength. Therefore, optimizing rehabilitative results requires an understanding of these connections. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate and compare the push-out bond strength of glass fiber posts and carbon fiber posts in root canals treated with calcium hydroxide-based, resin-based, and bioceramic-based endodontic sealers. METHODS: A total of 60 extracted human premolars will be used in this in vitro investigation. After canal preparation, specimens will be separated into 3 groups according to the type of sealer used (bioceramic-based, resin-based, and calcium hydroxide-based). The type of post (carbon fiber or glass fiber) will be used to further split each group into 2 subgroups. A universal testing machine will be used to exert a compressive force on each post to test its push-out bond strength. Bond strength data will be recorded in megapascals and analyzed using ANOVA and post hoc tests. RESULTS: The results are expected to demonstrate significant differences in push-out bond strength among different post and sealer combinations. Glass fiber posts are expected to have higher bond strength values than carbon fiber posts across all sealer groups, with the highest bond strength anticipated in the bioceramic-based sealer group. Resin-based sealers are expected to exhibit intermediate bond strength values, whereas calcium hydroxide-based sealers are expected to show the lowest bond strength values across both types of post. CONCLUSIONS: Glass fiber posts are expected to offer superior push-out bond strength in comparison to carbon fiber posts, especially when used with bioceramic-based sealers. The type of root canal sealer significantly affects bond strength, with bioceramic-based sealers providing the most reliable bond. Findings are expected that will suggest that careful selection of both post material and sealer type is necessary to enhance the long-term success of root canal restorations. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/76621.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".