Techniques for removing root canal posts – an in vitro study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5335/rfo.v26i2.13720Keywords:
In Vitro Techniques, Fiberglass Cast, Post-removal, Costs and Cost Analysis, Post and Core TechniqueAbstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to answer which is the best technique to removing glass fiber post and cast metal post considering time, preservation of tooth structure, and costs. Methods: An in vitro, randomized, blinded study was conducted. Sixty endodontically treated teeth were randomized into two groups according to post type. A second randomization was performed for each type of removal technique (ultrasound, drill, or combined; n=10). One-way ANOVA was used to compare the time to post removal, paired t-test compared the amount of tooth structure removed and Kruskal Wallis followed by post hoc Mann-Whitney test were used for cost analysis (P=0.05). Results: There was no difference in post removal time considering post type or technique (P=0.630). The average loss of tooth structure in the cervical region was greater than 30% when only a diamond bur was used to remove fiber glass post (P<0.00001) and cast metal post (P=0.008). Conclusion: According to the results of this study, we can conclude that the selection of the removal technique will depend on the skill of the operator, and some loss of tooth structure will always occur, although greater loss is expected when only diamond burs are used for this purpose.
Downloads
References
2. Martins MD, Junqueira RB, de Carvalho RF, Lacerda MFLS, Faé DS, Lemos CAA. Is a fiber post better than a metal post for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2021;112:103750.
3. Girotto LPS, Dotto L, Pereira GKR, Bacchi A, Sarkis-Onofre R. Restorative preferences and choices of dentists and students for restoring endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review of survey studies. J Prosthet Dent 2021;126(4):489-489.e5.
4. Sarkis-Onofre R, Amaral Pinheiro H, Poletto-Neto V, Bergoli CD, Cenci MS, Pereira-Cenci T. Randomized controlled trial comparing glass fiber posts and cast metal posts. J Dent 2020;96:103334
5. Gómez-Polo M, Llidó B, Rivero A, Del Río J, Celemín A. A 10-year retrospective study of the survival rate of teeth restored with metal prefabricated posts versus cast metal posts and cores. J Dent 2010;38(11):916–20.
6. da Luz-Silva G, Vetromilla BM, Pereira-Cenci T. Influence of post type on periapical status: a prospective study in a Brazilian population. Clin Oral Investig 2022;26(1):781–7.
7. Aydemir S, Arukaslan G, SarıdaÄŸ S, Kaya-Büyükbayram I, Ylıdıran Y. Comparing Fracture Resistance and the Time Required for Two Different Fiber Post Removal Systems. J Prosthodont 2018;27(8):771–4.
8. Wang X, Shu X, Zhang Y, Yang B, Jian Y, Zhao K. Evaluation of fiber posts vs metal posts for restoring severely damaged endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Quintessence Int (Berl) 2019;50(1).
9. Naumann M, Sterzenbach G, Dietrich T, Bitter K, Frankenberger R, von Stein-Lausnitz M. Dentin-like versus Rigid Endodontic Post: 11-year Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial on No-wall to 2-wall Defects. J Endod. 2017;43(11):1770–5.
10. Guerrero M, Ramirez MLG, Manjarrés V, Gutmann JL. Historical Perspectives on the Removal of Intraradicular Posts Prior to the Availability of Ultrasonic Applications. J Hist Dent 2020;68(2).
11. Poletto D, Poletto AC, Cavalaro A, Machado R, Cosme-Silva L, Garbelini CCD, et al. Smear layer removal by different chemical solutions used with or without ultrasonic activation after post preparation. Restor Dent Endod 2017;42(4):324.
12. Scotti N, Bergantin E, Alovisi M, Pasqualini D, Berutti E. Evaluation of a simplified fiber post removal system. J Endod. 2013 Nov;39(11):1431–4.
13. Soares JA, Brito-Júnior M, Fonseca DR, Melo AF, Cunha Santos SM, Soto Sotomayor NDC, et al. Influence of luting agents on time required for cast post removal by ultrasound: an in vitro study. J Appl Oral Sci 2009;17(3):145–9.
14. Berbert FLCV, Espir CG, Crisci FS, de Andrade MF, Chávez-Andrade GM, de Toledo Leonardo R, et al. Ultrasound Effect in the Removal of Intraradicular Posts Cemented with Different Materials. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015;16(6):437–41.
15. Sarkis-Onofre R, Jacinto RDC, Boscato N, Cenci MS, Pereira-Cenci T. Cast metal vs. glass fiber posts: a randomized controlled trial with up to 3 years of follow up. J Dent 2014;42(5):582–7.
16. 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(12):1557–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOEN.2012.08.015.
17. Figueiredo FED, Martins-Filho PRS, Faria-E-Silva AL. Do metal post-retained restorations result in more root fractures than fiber post-retained restorations? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endod 2015;41(3):309–16.
18. Roitman M, Pinasco L, Loiacono R, Panetta V, Anaise C, Rodríguez P. Efficacy of different instruments for the mechanical removal of the smear layer in immediate post preparations: a comparative study. Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2021;34(2):166–72.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under aCreative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0 Internacional.
