Comparison of the retention of 5 core materials supported by a dental post.
OBJECTIVE
This study evaluated the retention of dental post heads (No. 2 Flexi-Post) embedded in 5 core materials (1 automix resin composite, 2 hand-mixed resin composites, and 2 glass ionomers).


METHODS
Samples were prepared by embedding post heads in 4.5-mm-thick disks of core material.


RESULTS
The resin composite materials provided significantly more retention than the glass-ionomer-based materials. The post head retention of the automix resin composite was comparable to that of the hand-mixed resin composites.


CONCLUSIONS
Unlike the resin composite samples, all the glass-ionomer samples fractured during testing. This is an unacceptable condition for a clinically successful restoration.
Gu
Steven
S
Essential Dental Laboratories, South Hackensack, NJ 07606, USA. sgu@edsdental.com
Isidro
Mario
M
Deutsch
Allan S
AS
Musikant
Barry L
BL
D000704:Analysis of Variance; D016722:Cermet Cements; D003188:Composite Resins; D017268:Dental Prosthesis Retention; D003799:Dental Stress Analysis; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D008422:Materials Testing; D011176:Post and Core Technique
D016722:Cermet Cements; D003188:Composite Resins; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; C078801:Miracle Mix; C079578:Ti-Core composite resin