Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Post removal using a thick-walled hollow tube post design

B I Cohen1, M Pagnillo, S Condos

  • 1Essential Dental Laboratories, S. Hackensack, New Jersey, USA.

Oral Health
|November 1, 1994
PubMed
Summary

Post retention is crucial for restoring endodontically treated teeth. Smaller posts (0 and 1) were harder to remove with drills, often requiring manual extraction, while larger posts (2 and 3) were more amenable to drill removal.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Search for Subsolar-Mass Ultracompact Binaries in Advanced LIGO's First Observing Run.

Physical review letters·2018
Same author

Longitudinal and Transverse Instability of Ion Acoustic Waves.

Physical review letters·2017
Same author

Response to managed care.

Dentistry today·2009
Same author

Effect of EDTA conditioning upon the retention of fibre posts luted with resin cements.

International endodontic journal·2009
Same author

Numerical investigation of transients in the SSPX Spheromak.

Physical review letters·2005
Same author

Increasing the magnetic helicity content of a plasma by pulsing a magnetized source.

Physical review letters·2004

Area of Science:

  • Endodontics
  • Dental Materials Science

Background:

  • Post retention is vital for the success of restoring endodontically treated teeth.
  • Various luting agents and post designs are used, influencing retrievability.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the retrievability of Access Posts (Nos. 0-3) cemented with two different luting agents using retreatment drills.
  • To compare the effectiveness of retreatment drills versus manual removal for different post sizes.

Main Methods:

  • Eighty Access Posts were cemented into root canals using either Flexi-Flow cement with titanium or zinc phosphate cement.
  • Post removal was attempted using corresponding retreatment drills.

Main Results:

  • No. 0 posts and No. 1 posts cemented with zinc phosphate were not removed by drills; manual removal after cement seal breakage was necessary.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Retreatment drills successfully removed 60-70% of No. 2 posts and 70-80% of No. 3 posts.
  • Removal times ranged from 1-2 minutes for smaller posts and 2-3 minutes for larger posts.

    • Conclusions:

    • Root fractures were not observed during post removal with either technique.
    • Visual and radiographic analysis confirmed the absence of root damage.