Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Introduction:

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of calcium hydroxide and bioceramics used in perforation repair on the bonding strength of fiber posts via a push-out test.

Methodology:

This study used 106 extracted single-rooted human mandibular premolar teeth. Root canal preparations were performed with a rotary file system and perforations were created in the middle third of each tooth. The samples were randomized into two main experimental groups, one with calcium hydroxide and one without. Each group had four subgroups in which different bioceramic cements were applied (n = 11) and a control group (n = 9). The root canals perforations were repaired using MTA, Biodentine, Bioaggregate, and Endosequence BC root repair material. A fiber post was applied to each tooth and a push-out test was performed. The samples were examined at 40× magnification with a digital microscope in order to identify fracture type.

Results:

Bonding strength was calculated in MPa. A statistical analysis showed that the calcium hydroxide had no effect on the bonding strength of the fiber posts. A comparison of the perforation repair materials revealed that Biodentine in the calcium hydroxide group and Bioaggregate in both groups decreased the bonding strength compared to the other materials (p < 0.05). The most common failure type was adhesive failure between the dentin and resin cement (38.16%).

Conclusions:

The use of different perforation repair materials can affect the bonding strength of fiber posts. Therefore, the choice of perforation repair material should be made on an individual basis.

Keywords

MTA biodentine bioaggregate endosequence fiber post

Introduction

Failure of root canal treatment is usually due to procedural errors that lead to uncontrollable endodontic infection and results that fall below acceptable standards.¹ Perforations have been shown to be the second-leading cause of endodontic failure, with iatrogenic root perforations detected in between 2% and 12% of endodontically treated teeth.² Perforations may be observed during access-cavity preparation, root canal shaping or filling, or post insertion.³ In order for a root perforation to be treated successfully, it must be sealed with a material that can prevent or eliminate bacterial infection at the perforation site.⁴ For these reasons, calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)₂) and bioceramic materials have come into widespread use for perforation repair.

The antibacterial properties of Ca(OH)₂ and its ability to inhibit root resorption and promote calcification have led to its frequent use as an intracanal medicament.^5,6 Calcium hydroxide’s therapeutic effectiveness stems from its release of hydroxyl ions, which increases the pH⁷ and thus the effectiveness of alkaline phosphatase, an important enzyme in alkaline-pH calcification, which requires an optimal pH of 10.2.⁸ The hydroxyl ions in Ca(OH)₂ also denature bacterial proteins and destroy bacterial DNA.⁹ According to a study by Nerwich et al.,¹⁰ hydroxyl ions require 7 days to fully penetrate the dentin tubules; thus, calcium hydroxide needs to remain in the root canal for at least 7 days. However, long-term intracanal application of calcium hydroxide has been shown to have an adverse effect on the physical and chemical structure of dentin, increasing its fragility and making it prone to fracture by disrupting the connection between the hydroxyapatite and collagen network that lends dentin its flexibility.¹¹ Dentin microhardness has been shown to decrease as a result of long-term use of calcium hydroxide as an intracanal medication,¹² with notable changes in fracture-resistance reported if calcium hydroxide is allowed to remain in the canal for more than 10 days.¹³ In fact, studies have shown that calcium hydroxide cannot be completely removed from root canals with any of a wide range of commonly used devices or techniques,^14–17 and it has been suggested that residual calcium hydroxide may reduce the bond strength of fiber posts subsequently applied to root canals.^18–20

Ceramics are inorganic, non-metallic materials formed by subjecting raw minerals to high temperatures.²¹ Bioceramics refer to both biocompatible ceramic materials and metal oxides that possess good sealing, antibacterial and antifungal characteristics, and are used in medicine and dentistry²² for their ability to mimic or induce tissue regeneration.^23,24 Bioceramic materials commonly used in endodontic treatment include Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA; ProRoot MTA, Dentsply Tulsa, USA), Biodentine (Septodont, Saint-Mauredes Fossés, France), BioAggregate (Innovative BioCeramix, Vancouver, BC, Canada) and EndoSequence BC root repair material (Brasseler, Savannah, GA, USA). These materials, which have long been known for their safety when applied to living tissue, are frequently used in root canal treatment for creating an apical barrier and to repair root perforations.²⁵

Teeth with clinical root perforations may also suffer from severe crown destruction, and a variety of post-core systems have been developed to treat these conditions. Although metal posts were used initially, the incompatibility between the elastic modulus of these posts and the surrounding structures were shown to create stress concentrations leading to root fracture, thus prompting the development of posts constructed with different shapes and sizes and from different materials.²⁶ Fiber posts, which have an elastic modulus lower than metal and higher than dentin, have been observed to result in a better distribution of stress^26,27 and have been recommended as an alternative to prefabricated and metal posts for restoring teeth that have had previous root-canal treatment²⁸ and possess insufficient remaining crown structure to provide adequate core retention.²⁰ The reduction in stresses transmitted to the root canal walls as a result of the relative similarity between the elasticity modulus of fiber posts and that of dentin reduces the risk of vertical fractures.²⁹ Regardless of post material, stress concentrations are reported to occur mainly at the apical and cervical regions of the tooth, although flexible posts result in stress concentrations in dentin, whereas rigid posts result in stress concentrations at the interfaces between dentin, cement, and post.³⁰ A number of studies have suggested that the distribution of stress can be optimized by using an non-homogenous post design with a functionally graded stiffness that decreases from crown to apex.^26,27

Fiber-post failures have been shown to be less destructive than metal-post failures and failure mainly occurs from technical errors that occur during the cementation process. When compared to metal posts, prefabricated fiber posts require a thicker layer of cement.^27,31 Despite the interaction between post and dentin produced with the use of resin cement, various bonding failures have been reported,³² and it has been suggested that these failures may be related to the materials used in endodontic treatment, such as calcium hydroxide.³³ In addition to intracanal medicaments that change the structure of root-canal dentin, bonding at dentin-cement-post interfaces can also be affected by root-canal irrigation solutions, filling materials, and bioceramics as well as by the preparation of the post space and the presence/thickness of a smear layer.²⁰

Perforation repair materials and their interactions with residual calcium hydroxide used as an intercanal medicament may affect the bond strength of prefabricated fiber posts. This in vitro study compared the effects of four different root-repair materials (MTA, Biodentine, BioAggregate, EndoSequence BC) with and without calcium hydroxide on the bond strength of fiber posts. Bond strength was evaluated using the push-out test. The study’s null hypotheses were as follows: (1) Calcium hydroxide treatment does not affect the bond strength of fiber posts to dentin; and (2) Bioceramics used for root perforation repair do not affect the bond strength between fiber posts and dentin.

Materials and methods

After receiving approval from the Inonu University Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee (2017/25-8), this study was conducted with 106 teeth extracted from patients (maximum age: 35) for orthodontic or periodontal reasons. All teeth were caries-free, flat, single-rooted, single-canal mandibular premolars with a root length >14 mm and completed apical development. Periodontal tissue remnants and attachments were removed using a periodontal curette, and the teeth were examined under a digital microscope (RoHS, China) at ×40 magnification to ensure they were free of fractures, cracks, abrasion, erosion and resorption. All teeth were stored in distilled water prior to the experiment.

Tooth preparation

Crowns were dissected with a diamond disc under water cooling to obtain roots of 14 mm in length as measured by a caliper. A #10 Type K file was introduced into the root canal, and working length was determined as 1 mm short of its appearance in the apical foramen. Root-canal shaping was completed using iRace rotary files (FKG, La Chaux, Fonds, Switzerland) at 600 RPM and 1.5 Ncm torque, concluding with an R3 (30/.04 dia.) file in line with the manufacturer’s instructions. Root canals were irrigated with 2 ml of 2.5% NaOCl between files and with 2 ml 2.5% NaOCl, 2 ml 17% EDTA, and 2 ml 2.5% NaOCl solutions, respectively and separately, as a final irrigation. Root canals were dried using paper points (DiaDent Europe, Almere, The Netherlands).

An artificial perforation was created in the middle third of each root using a diameter of 2 mm round diamond bur. Teeth were then randomly divided into two groups according to whether or not calcium-hydroxide treatment was performed, and both groups were further divided according to perforation-repair material, as follows (n = 11 for experimental subgroups, n = 9 for control subgroups):

Group 1: Samples with Ca(OH)₂ treatment

1a: MTA

1b: Biodentine

1c: BioAggregate

1d: EndoSequence BC Root Repair Material

1e: Control Group (root canal treatment and fiber post application without perforation)

Group 2: Samples without Ca(OH)₂ treatment

2a: MTA

2b: Biodentine

2c: BioAggregate

2d: EndoSequence BC Root Repair Material

2e: Control Group (root canal treatment and fiber post application without perforation)

In Group 1, Ca(OH)₂ paste (DiaPaste, DiaDent Europe, Almere, The Netherlands) was placed in the root canal of each tooth using a lentulo spiral, and the teeth were stored at 37°C and 100% humidity for 7 days. The Ca(OH)₂ was then removed from the root canals using ultrasonic tips (DT-009 tip, EMS S.A, Nyon, Switzerland) applied for 2 min under 2.5% NaOCl irrigation. A final irrigation was performed with a sequence of 2 ml 2.5% NaOCl, 2 ml 17% EDTA, 2 ml 2.5% NaOCl, and 2 ml distilled water solutions, and the root canals were dried with paper points.

Root-canal fillings were performed on all teeth using gutta-percha cones and a root-canal sealer. AH Plus sealer (Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Konstanz Germany) was applied to the apical part of a 30/.04 master gutta-percha cone (DiaDent, Almere, The Netherlands), which was then placed in the canal without touching the perforation area and laterally condensed with 1-2 cones. Since a 30/.04 R3 file was used as the final file for shaping, a 30/.04 master gutta-percha cone was fully compatible with the root canal. After the root-canal filling was completed, the gutta-percha cones were sheared off at the canal orifice using a gutta-cut device (VDW Dental, Munich, Germany). A cotton pellet was placed in the area of the artificial perforation, and zinc phosphate cement was applied as a temporary filling. Teeth were stored at 37°C and 100% humidity for 1 week in order to allow the root-canal sealer to completely set. For all groups except Groups 1e and 2e (control groups), a bioceramic (MTA, BioAggregate, Biodentine, or EndoSequence BC) was applied to the external root surface at the perforation site, and the teeth were stored for 24 h at 37°C and 100% humidity to allow the material to fully set prior to post application.

Post space preparation and post cementation

Posts were applied using the Rebilda dual-curing flowable core build-up and post luting system (VOCO, Cuxhaven, Germany) in line with the manufacturers’ instructions. A drill with a diameter of 1 mm was used to create a 9-mm long post space, which was then flushed with 2 ml 17% EDTA followed by 2 ml distilled water and dried with paper points. A fiber post having a diameter of 1 mm was disinfected with alcohol applied using a cotton pellet, and the post was air-dried. An adhesive cement (Ceramic Bond, VOCO, Cuxhaven, Germany) was applied to the post surface and allowed to remain there for 60 s before air-drying, and another adhesive (Futurabond, VOCO, Cuxhaven, Germany) was applied to the root canal and access cavity for 20 s and dried. Rebilda DC was then injected into the root canal using the application tip provided, the post was placed in the filled root canal, and the sample was light-cured for 40 s.

Push-out test

Following post cementation, teeth were embedded in transparent orthodontic cold-cure acrylic (Integra, Ankara, Turkey) and sectioned perpendicular to the long axis of the tooth using an IsoMet 1000 (Isomet, Buehler, IL, USA) saw under water-cooling to obtain a sample with a thickness of 2 mm that included the apical and coronal areas to the artificial root perforation. Samples were placed in the push-out test assembly (Figure 1; Autograph desktop model, Shimadzu Corp, Japan) with the apical parts facing up. The cylindrical metal tip (diameter of 0.75 mm) of the testing device was positioned on the center of the fiber post, and a force was applied at a speed of 0.5 mm/min until fracture. Data were recorded in Newtons (N) and converted to megapascals (MPa) using the formula: Bond Strength (MPa) = Peak Force (N)/Area (Post-dentin interface area). Post dentin interface area was calculated according to the formula $π (R_{1} + R_{2}) \sqrt{{(R_{1} - R_{2})}^{2} + h^{2}}$ , where π = 3.14, R₁ = the diameter of the canal at the coronal part of the section, R₂ = the diameter of the canal at the apical part of the section, and h = the height of the section.

Figure 1.

Schematic drawing of push-out test.

Fracture types were examined under a digital microscope (RoHS, China) at ×40 magnification and classified as follows: (a) cohesive fracture within the resin cement or post, (b) adhesive fracture at the cement-post interface, (c) adhesive fracture at the cement-dentin interface, (d) mixed cohesive/adhesive fracture.

Statistical analysis

Data was analyzed using the statistical software package SPSS 22.0 (IBM, Chicago, Illinois, USA) software, and descriptive data ((arithmetic means (mean) ± standard deviations (SD), medians (M), minimums (Min), and maximums (Max)) were recorded. A Shapiro–Wilk test was conducted to determine normality of data distribution, and Kruskal–Wallis, Conover, Unpaired t, and Mann–Whitney U tests were applied accordingly, with a level of p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

Results

Comparative analysis of the bond strengths of perforation repair materials to fiber posts showed significant differences between the groups (p < 0.05). According to a Conover paired comparison test, the Biodentine (1b) and BioAggregate (1c) subgroups resulted in significantly lower bond strengths (p = 0.024) as compared to the MTA (1a), EndoSequence BC (1d) and control subgroups (1e) when used in conjunction with Ca(OH)₂. In the subgroups tested without Ca(OH)₂, BioAggregate (2c) was found to result in significantly lower bond strengths in comparison to all other subgroups (2a, b, d, e) (p = 0.039; Table 1).

Table 1.

Bond strength values of the subgroups (MPa).

	M *	Min	Max	N
Calcium hydroxide
MTA	4.70	3.70	10.03	11
Biodentine	4.43^d,a	3.17	9.65	11
Bioaggregate	4.18^d,c	3.23	6.42	11
Endosequence	5.90^a,b	1.17	7.50	11
Control	6.40^b	4.92	7.15	9
No calcium hydroxide
MTA	5.67^y	3.38	10.98	11
Biodentine	4.73	3.10	8.95	11
Bioaggregate	4.25^x	3.28	6.60	11
Endosequence	4.59	3.75	8.99	11
Control	6.63^y	4.96	8.33	9

Different superscript letters in the same column indicate subgroups with statistical differences within that main group (p < 0.05).

Bond strengths of samples using the same root-perforation material (and control) subgroups with and without Ca(OH)₂ were compared using Kruskal–Wallis and Unpaired t-tests for the BioAggregate subgroups and Mann–Whitney U tests for the remaining subgroups (Table 2). According to the results, calcium hydroxide had no significant effect on bond strength (p > 0.05).

Table 2.

Comparison of bond strengths of Ca(OH)₂ and non-Ca(OH)₂ subgroups.

	M	Min	Max	p
MTA and Ca(OH)₂	4.70	3.70	10.03	0.622^x
MTA	5.67	3.38	10.98	0.622^x
Biodentine and Ca(OH)₂	4.43	3.17	9.65	0.670^x
Biodentine	4.73	3.10	8.95	0.670^x
Bioaggregate and Ca(OH)₂	4.25	3.28	6.60	0.870^y
Bioaggregate	4.18	3.23	6.42	0.870^y
Endosequence and Ca(OH)₂	5.90	1.17	7.50	0.341^x
Endosequence	4.59	3.75	8.99	0.341^x
Ca(OH)₂ control group	6.40	4.92	7.15	0.227^x
Control group without Ca(OH)₂	6.63	4.96	8.33	0.227^x

Different superscript letters in the same column indicate the different type of statistical analysis applied.

Paired comparison of the groups was performed using the Mann–Whitney U test, since the groups here show normal distribution.

Paired comparison of BioAggregate groups was performed using the Unpaired t test, since the groups here did not show normal distribution.

Examination of the samples under a digital microscope at ×40 magnification following push-out testing identified the most common fracture type to be adhesive failure at the dentin-cement interface (Table 3; Figure 2).

Table 3.

Classification of fracture types following push-out testing.

	Cohesive		Adhesive		Mix
	Resin cement	Post (Type a)	Resin cement-post (Type b)	Resin cement-dentin (Type c)	(Type d)
Calcium hydroxide
MTA	–	2 (2.12%)	4 (4.24%)	2 (2.12%)	3 (3.18%)
Biodentine	–	1 (1.06%)	3 (3.18%)	5 (5.30%)	2 (2.12%)
Bioaggregate	–	–	3 (3.18%)	5 (5.30%)	3 (3.18%)
Endosequence	–	1 (1.06%)	4 (4.24%)	5 (5.30%)	1 (1.06%)
Control	–	–	1 (1.06%)	1 (1.06%)	1 (1.06%)
No calcium hydroxide
MTA	–	–	4 (4.24%)	5 (5.30%)	2 (2.12%)
Biodentine	–	2 (2.12%)	3 (3.18%)	3 (3.18%)	3 (3.18%)
Bioaggregate	–	–	5 (5.30%)	5 (5.30%)	1 (1.06%)
Endosequence	–	2 (2.12%)	4 (4.24%)	3 (3.18%)	2 (2.12%)
Control	–	–	1 (1.06%)	2 (2.12%)	–
Total	–	8 (8.48%)	32 (33.92%)	36 (38.16%)	18 (19.08%)

Figure 2.

Four fracture types: (a) cohesive fracture within post, (b) adhesive fracture between resin cement-post, (c) adhesive fracture between resin cement-dentin, and (d) mixed cohesive/adhesive fracture.

Discussion

Artificial communication between the root-canal system and surrounding dental or oral tissue has a negative effect on endodontic treatment and frequently results in treatment failure that requires tooth extraction. The use of a biocompatible material for perforation repair aims to seal the root for preventing leakage and for promoting regeneration of damaged periodontal tissue. Calcium hydroxide is frequently applied in the presence of a perforation. When the material comes into direct contact with vital tissue, a necrotic layer forms that acts as a precursor to mineralization, causing tissue dissolution and creating new granulation tissue that enters the perforation defect to promote wound healing.³⁴

Conflicting results have been reported regarding the effects of Ca(OH)₂ on the bond strength of fiber posts, with some studies reporting that the intracanal application of calcium hydroxide reduces bond strength,¹⁸ others suggest that it increases bond strength,¹⁹ and still others suggest that it has no effect³⁵ on bond strength. Both Lee et al.¹⁸ and Barbizam et al.³⁶ have stressed the importance of completely removing Ca(OH)₂ from the canal prior to filling, as any residual Ca(OH)₂ may adversely affect the quality of the root filling and subsequent fiber post. According to Someya et al.,³⁵ the observed reductions in bond strength are due to the buffing effect of the alkaline Ca(OH)₂ on the etching components and acidic monomers in the adhesive systems.

In fact, the removal of residual calcium hydroxide from irregular canal walls is fairly difficult.³⁷ Although various techniques have been proposed,^38,39 including endodontic hand files,¹⁶ sonic activation,⁴⁰ passive ultrasonic irrigation,¹⁷ a canal-brush system and nickel-titanium (NiTi) rotary files, none of these methods have been shown to be capable of completely removing Ca(OH)₂ from root canals. Our study’s overall finding that the application of calcium hydroxide did not affect the bond strength of fiber posts (p > 0.05) may be due to our use of passive ultrasonic irrigation with sodium hypochlorite agitation following calcium hydroxide treatment to remove any residual reagent that might affect the adhesive system.

In our study, MTA had no significant effect on the bond strengths between fiber posts and dentin (p > 0.05). This finding conflicts with a study by Pereira et al.,⁴¹ which reported that MTA used for perforation repair in the cervical region of the root canal reduced the bond strength of fiber posts. The authors suggested that the bonding of fiber posts was negatively affected by the reduced area of dentin at the adhesive interface as a result of the root perforation as well as contamination of the dentin adjacent to the perforation area with MTA.⁴¹ The difference in findings between studies may be due to differences in cementation procedures. Whereas Pereira et al.⁴¹ performed cementation of fiber posts immediately after MTA application, in our study, cementation was performed 24 h after application of MTA, which has a mean setting time of 140 ± 3 m. By allowing the MTA to set completely, the possibility of any unset MTA particles contaminating the resin cement and affecting bond strength was eliminated.

Our study found that the fiber posts in the Biodentine subgroups had lower bond strengths when compared to the other subgroups; however, the difference was only significant for the group treated with Ca(OH)₂ (p = 0.024). Meraji and Camilleri⁴² found that acid-etching produced micromechanical and chemical changes in the structure of Biodentine and that these changes were more pronounced with self-etch systems than with total-etch systems, creating areas of irregularity in the Biodentine surface.⁴² Considering that our study used a self-etch adhesive system for bonding, it may be suggested that the observed reduction of the bond strength of the fiber posts used in teeth repaired with Biodentine was due to a deterioration in the material structure resulting from the processes occurring within the adhesive cement applied prior to bonding.

Our study also showed the bond strength of fiber posts in samples repaired with BioAggregate to be lower in comparison to other repair materials, regardless of whether or not calcium hydroxide was used (p < 0.05). According to Camilleri et al.,⁴³ BioAggregate powder has a specific surface area higher than that of ProRoot MTA and a high degree of internal porosity due to the presence of calcium silicate, as seen in scanning electron microscope examination. The authors stated that because of the high specific surface area and internal porosity, BioAggregate requires more water to obtain an adequate mixture, and this high water-to-powder ratio results in a high material porosity and poor physical properties and subsequent poor bond strength and material deterioration. Accordingly, the low bond strength of fiber posts found in our study when root repair was performed using BioAggregate may be explained by deterioration in the material structure.

To our knowledge, there is no study in the literature evaluating the effect of EndoSequence BC root-repair material on the bond strength of fiber posts. In our study, EndoSequence BC root-repair material was found to have no significant effect on the bond strength of fiber posts (p > 0.05).

In view of the above findings, the study’s first null hypothesis, which suggests that calcium hydroxide treatment does not affect the bond strength of fiber posts, was accepted (p > 0.05; Table 2). However, the study’s second null hypothesis, which suggests that the bond strength of fiber posts is not affected by the bioceramics used for root perforation repair, was rejected, as the bond strength of fiber posts was reduced in the Biodentine/Ca(OH)₂ subgroup and in both BioAggregate subgroups (p < 0.05).

Digital microscope examination of bond failures in the present study showed most failures were characterized by adhesive facture between the dentin and resin cement, which is in line with findings of previous studies conducted by Teixeria⁴⁴ and Kececi et al.⁴⁵ In our study, only 8 out of 106 fractures were due to cohesive failure of the fiber posts. Whereas post cohesive fractures indicate that the bonding between both cement and dentin and cement and post is better than the stability of the post itself,⁴⁶ adhesive failure at the cement-post interface is thought to occur due to an insufficient chemical bond between the resin cement and fiber post.

Conclusion

Calcium hydroxide treatment does not affect the bond strength of fiber posts and, accordingly, can be used as an intracanal medicament when necessary in teeth requiring a fiber post for restoration.

The choice of either MTA or EndoSequence BC to repair root peforations offers a mechanically successful approach in teeth requiring subsequent treatment with a fiber post

Digital microscope examination of fiber-post bond failure showing the majority of failures to occur within the root canal at the dentin-resin cement interface is an indication that the bond formed between fiber posts and resin cement is stronger than the bond formed between cement and dentin.

Footnotes

Author Note

This study was presented as an oral presentation at The 20th Scientific Congress of Asian Pacific Endodontic Confederation & the 14th International Congress of Turkish Endodontic Society, 24-27 April 2019, Istanbul, Turkey.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This project was supported by Inonu University/Turkey, Scientific Research Projects Unit (TDH-2018-880). The authors deny any conflict of interest.

ORCID iDs

Oğuz Tavsan

Neslihan Simsek

References

Siqueira

Jr . Aetiology of root canal treatment failure: why well-treated teeth can fail. Int Endod J 2001; 34: 1–10.

Sinai

Romea

Glassman

Morse

Fantasia

Furst

. An evaluation of tricalcium phosphate as a treatment for endodontic perforations. J Endod 1989; 15: 399–403.

Motamedi

. Root perforations following endodontics: a case for surgical management. Gen Dent 2007; 55: 19–21.

Beavers

Bergenholtz

Cox

. Periodontal wound healing following intentional root perforations in permanent teeth of Macaca mulatta. Int Endod J 1986; 19: 36–44.

Jeon

Park

Chung

Choung

. Dental stem cell therapy with calcium hydroxide in dental pulp capping. Tissue Eng Part A 2010; 16: 1823–1833.

Barbosa

Goncalves

Siqueira

Jr De Uzeda

. Evaluation of the antibacterial activities of calcium hydroxide, chlorhexidine, and camphorated paramonochlorophenol as intracanal medicament. A clinical and laboratory study. J Endod 1997; 23: 297–300.

Guigand

Vulcain

Dautel-Morazin

Bonnaure-Mallet

. In vitro study of intradentinal calcium diffusion induced by two endodontic biomaterials. J Endod 1997; 23: 387–390.

Foreman

Barnes

. Review of calcium hydroxide. Int Endod J 1990; 23: 283–297.

Siqueira

Jr Lopes

. Mechanisms of antimicrobial activity of calcium hydroxide: a critical review. Int Endod J 1999; 32: 361–369.

10.

Nerwich

Figdor

Messer

. pH changes in root dentin over a 4-week period following root canal dressing with calcium hydroxide. J Endod 1993; 19: 302–306.

11.

Andreasen

Farik

Munksgaard

. Long-term calcium hydroxide as a root canal dressing may increase risk of root fracture. Dent Traumatol 2002; 18: 134–137.

12.

Naseri

Eftekhar

Gholami

Atai

Dianat

. The effect of calcium hydroxide and nano-calcium hydroxide on microhardness and superficial chemical structure of root canal dentin: an ex vivo study. J Endod 2019; 45: 1148–1154.

13.

Marending

Stark

Brunner

Fischer

Zehnder

. Comparative assessment of time-related bioactive glass and calcium hydroxide effects on mechanical properties of human root dentin. Dent Traumatol 2009; 25: 126–129.

14.

Nandini

Velmurugan

Kandaswamy

. Removal efficiency of calcium hydroxide intracanal medicament with two calcium chelators: volumetric analysis using spiral CT, an in vitro study. J Endod 2006; 32: 1097–1101.

15.

Lambrianidis

Margelos

Beltes

. Removal efficiency of calcium hydroxide dressing from the root canal. J Endod 1999; 25: 85–88.

16.

Lambrianidis

Kosti

Boutsioukis

Mazinis

. Removal efficacy of various calcium hydroxide/chlorhexidine medicaments from the root canal. Int Endod J 2006; 39: 55–61.

17.

van der Sluis

Wesselink

. The evaluation of removal of calcium hydroxide paste from an artificial standardized groove in the apical root canal using different irrigation methodologies. Int Endod J 2007; 40: 52–57.

18.

Lee

Lin

Chen

Chang

. Influence of calcium hydroxide dressing and acid etching on the push-out bond strengths of three luting resins to root canal dentin. Clin Oral Investig 2014; 18: 489–498.

19.

Zare Jahromi

Barekatain

Ravanbod

Ranjbarian

Kousehlar

. Comparison of endodontic medicaments on bond strength of fiber post to root dentin using resin cement. J Dent (Shiraz) 2017; 18: 56–60.

20.

Chaudhary

Kumar

Taneja

. Evaluation of the effect of calcium hydroxide and endodontic irrigants on the push-out bond strength of fiber post – an in vitro study. Clujul Med 2018; 91: 458–461.

21.

Rosenblum

Schulman

. A review of all-ceramic restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1997; 128: 297–307.

22.

Vallet-Regí

. Evolution of bioceramics within the field of biomaterials. Comp R Chimie 2010; 13: 174–185.

23.

Torabinejad

Parirokh

. Mineral trioxide aggregate: a comprehensive literature review—part II: leakage and biocompatibility investigations. J Endod 2010; 36: 190–202.

24.

Parirokh

Torabinejad

. Mineral trioxide aggregate: a comprehensive literature review—part III: clinical applications, drawbacks, and mechanism of action. J Endod 2010; 36: 400–413.

25.

Raghavendra

Jadhav

Gathani

Kotadia

. Bioceramics in endodontics – a review. J Istanb Univ Fac Dent 2017; 51: S128–S137.

26.

Lee

Shin

Kim

, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of a tooth restored with high performance polymer PEKK post-core system: a 3D finite element analysis. Biomed Res Int 2017; 2017: 1373127.

27.

Gloria

Maietta

Martorelli

Lanzotti

Watts

Ausiello

. FE analysis of conceptual hybrid composite endodontic post designs in anterior teeth. Dent Mater 2018; 34: 1063–1071.

28.

Cagidiaco

Radovic

Simonetti

Tay

Ferrari

. Clinical performance of fiber post restorations in endodontically treated teeth: 2-year results. Int J Prosthodont 2007; 20: 293–298.

29.

Asmussen

Peutzfeldt

Heitmann

. Stiffness, elastic limit, and strength of newer types of endodontic posts. J Dent 1999; 27: 275–278.

30.

Ausiello

Ciaramella

Martorelli

, et al. Mechanical behavior of endodontically restored canine teeth: effects of ferrule, post material and shape. Dent Mater 2017; 33: 1466–1472.

31.

Faria

Rodrigues

de Almeida Antunes

de Mattos Mda

Ribeiro

. Endodontically treated teeth: characteristics and considerations to restore them. J Prosthodont Res 2011; 55: 69–74.

32.

Monticelli

Grandini

Goracci

Ferrari

. Clinical behavior of translucent-fiber posts: a 2-year prospective study. Int J Prosthodont 2003; 16: 593–596.

33.

Renovato

Santana

Ferreira

Souza

Soares

Estrela

. Effect of calcium hydroxide and endodontic irrigants on fibre post bond strength to root canal dentine. Int Endod J 2013; 46: 738–746.

34.

Bogaerts

. Treatment of root perforations with calcium hydroxide and SuperEBA cement: a clinical report. Int Endod J 1997; 30: 210–219.

35.

Someya

Kinoshita

Harada

Kawada

Takemoto

. Effects of calcium hydroxide reagent on the bond strength of resin cements to root dentin and the retention force of FRC posts. Dent Mater J 2017; 36: 630–637.

36.

Barbizam

Trope

Teixeira

Tanomaru-Filho

Teixeira

. Effect of calcium hydroxide intracanal dressing on the bond strength of a resin-based endodontic sealer. Braz Dent J 2008; 19: 224–227.

37.

Ricucci

Langeland

. Incomplete calcium hydroxide removal from the root canal: a case report. Int Endod J 1997; 30: 418–421.

38.

Tasdemir

Celik

Yildirim

Ceyhanli

Yesilyurt

. Efficacy of several techniques for the removal of calcium hydroxide medicament from root canals. Int Endod J 2011; 44: 505–509.

39.

Soares

Leonardo

da Silva

Tanomaru Filho

Ito

. Effect of rotary instrumentation and of the association of calcium hydroxide and chlorhexidine on the antisepsis of the root canal system in dogs. Braz Oral Res 2006; 20: 120–126.

40.

Kuga

Campos

Faria-Junior

Shinohara

. Efficacy of NiTi rotary instruments in removing calcium hydroxide dressing residues from root canal walls. Braz Oral Res 2012; 26: 19–23.

41.

Pereira

Brito-Júnior

Faria-E-S

, et al. Does MTA affect fiber post retention in repaired cervical root canal perforations? Braz Oral Res. 2016; 30: S1806-83242016000100268.

42.

Meraji

Camilleri

. Bonding over dentin replacement materials. J Endod 2017; 43: 1343–1349.

43.

Camilleri

Sorrentino

Damidot

. Characterization of un-hydrated and hydrated BioAggregate and MTA Angelus. Clin Oral Investig 2015; 19: 689–698.

44.

Teixeira

Pasternak-Junior

Borges

Paulino

Sousa-Neto

. Influence of endodontic sealers on the bond strength of carbon fiber posts. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2008; 84: 430–435.

45.

Kececi

Ureyen Kaya

Adanir

. Micro push-out bond strengths of four fiber-reinforced composite post systems and 2 luting materials. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 105: 121–128.

46.

Erdemir

Mumcu

Topcu

Yildiz

Yamanel

Akyol

. Micro push-out bond strengths of 2 fiber post types luted using different adhesive strategies. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2010; 110: 534–544.

The effects of root canal perforation repair materials on the bond strength of fiber posts

Abstract

Introduction:

Methodology:

Results:

Conclusions:

Keywords

Introduction

Materials and methods

Tooth preparation

Group 1: Samples with Ca(OH)2 treatment

Group 2: Samples without Ca(OH)2 treatment

Post space preparation and post cementation

Push-out test

Statistical analysis

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Footnotes

Author Note

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

References

Group 1: Samples with Ca(OH)₂ treatment

Group 2: Samples without Ca(OH)₂ treatment