Submitted:
18 September 2025
Posted:
22 September 2025
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
- elements belonging to Group 1 (HP) have been restored with radiopaque quartz fiber hollow posts (TECHOLE size S, Isasan™). The cementation technique involves seating the hollow post to the full depth of the post-space. With these quartz fiber hollow posts, it is no longer necessary to first fill the canal with cement and then insert the post; instead, everything’s performed in a single step where the post simultaneously acts as the guide that carries the cement into the canal. The micro-hybrid dual-curing luting composite (NEW TECHCORE A, Isasan™) was positioned with an automixing syringe through the post itself, which comes equipped with an adapter and is connected to the mixing tip of the cement syringe followed by light curing for 40 seconds using a light-curing unit.
- elements belonging to group 2 (SP) have been restored with radiopaque quartz fiber solid posts (TECH21XOP Ø12, Isasan™). The micro-hybrid dual-curing flowable composite cement resin cement (NEW TECHCORE A, Isasan™) was positioned with an automixing syringe provided by the manufacturer. Using finger pressure (30 seconds) the endodontic post was placed to full depth and followed by light curing for 40 seconds with a light curing unit.
3. Results
- Hp1: Mann-Whitney U-test showed a statistically significant difference (p=0,0007) between the H and S groups about the formation of air voids in the cement used for luting the two different kinds of posts, with hollow posts granting a better adhesion (Table 4)(Figure 5). The null hypothesis is therefore rejected.
- Hp2: Mann-Whitney U-test showed a statistically significant difference (p=0,0433) between the H and S groups about the ability to achieve the post space most apical portion (Table 5). The null hypothesis is rejected as well.
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Patel, S.; Bhuva, B.; Bose, R. Present status and future directions: vertical root fractures in root filled teeth. Int. Endod. J. 2022, 55 Suppl 3 (Suppl 3), 804–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gbadebo, O.S.; Ajayi, D.M.; Oyekunle, O.O.; Shaba, P.O. Randomized clinical study comparing metallic and glass fiber post in restoration of endodontically treated teeth. Indian J. Dent. Res. 2014, 25(1), 58–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rathke, A. , Frehse, H., & Hrusa, B. (2022). Vertical root fracture resistance and crack formation of root canal-treated teeth restored with different post-luting systems. Odontology, 110(4), 719–725. [CrossRef]
- Dietschi, D.; Duc, O.; Krejci, I.; Sadan, A. Biomechanical considerations for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a systematic review of the literature. Part II (Evaluation of fatigue behavior, interfaces, and in vivo studies). Quintessence Int. 2008, 39, 117–129. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Maddalone, M.; Bianco, E.; Spolnik, K.J.; Mirabelli, L.; Gagliani, M.; Fabbro, M.D. Immediate Autotransplantation of Molars with Closed Apex. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 2022, 23(4), 453–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scavia, S.; Roncucci, R.; Bianco, E.; Mirabelli, L.; Bader, A.; Maddalone, M. Vertical Bone Augmentation with GBR Pocket Technique: Surgical Procedure and Preliminary Results. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 2021, 22(12), 1370–1376. [Google Scholar]
- Maddalone, M.; Mirabelli, L.; Breschigliaro, S.; Baldoni, M. Radiographic Evaluation of the Bone Remodeling on Tilted Osseointegrated Implants: Follow-up at 1 Year. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 2020, 21(4), 463–470. [Google Scholar]
- Carvalho, M.A.; Lazari, P.C.; Gresnigt, M.; Del Bel Cury, A.A.; Magne, P. Current options concerning the endodontically-treated teeth restoration with the adhesive approach. Braz. Oral Res. 2018, 32 (suppl 1), e74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jardim, J.S.; Ferreira, V.M.F.; Fernandes E Oliveira, H.F.; Faé, D.S.; Lemos, C.A.A. Is the use of an intraradicular post essential for reducing failures in restoring endodontically treated teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Dent. 1: 9, 1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belli, S.; Eraslan, O.; Eskitascioglu, G.; Karbhari, V. Monoblocks in root canals: a finite elemental stress analysis study. Int. Endod. J. 2011, 44(9), 817–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akkayan, B.; Gulmez, T. Resistance to fracture of root canal treated teeth restored with different post systems. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2002, 87, 431–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plotino, G.; Grande, N.M.; Pameijer, C.H.; Somma, F. Influence of surface remodeling using burs on the macro and micro surface morphology of anatomically formed fiber posts. Int. Endod. J. 2008, 41, 345–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grandini, S.; Goracci, C.; Monticelli, F.; Borracchini, A.; Ferrari, M. SEM evaluation of the cement layer thickness after luting two different posts. J. Adhes. Dent. 2005, 7, 235–240. [Google Scholar]
- Van Ende, A.; Van de Casteele, E.; Depypere, M.; De Munck, J.; Li, X.; Maes, F.; Wevers, M.; Van Meerbeek, B. 3D volumetric displacement and strain analysis of composite polymerization. Dent. Mater. 2015, 4, 453–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Milleding, P.; Ortengren, U.; Karlsson, S. Ceramic inlay systems: some clinical aspects. J. Oral Rehabil. 1995, 22, 571–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Inaba, Y.; Teraoka, F.; Nakagawa, M.; Imazato, S. Development of a new direct core build-up method using a hollow fiber-reinforced post. Dent. Mater. J. 2013, 32, 718–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schwartz, R.S.; Robbins, J.W. Post placement and restoration of endodontically treated teeth: a literature review. J. Endod. 2004, 30, 289–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Figueiredo, F.E.; Martins-Filho, P.R.; Faria-E-Silva, A.L. 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. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bianco, E. Dental Service in European Airports: An Analysis on Dental Care Provided by Airports Accommodating More than 20 Million Passengers. Tourism and Hospitality 2025, 6(2), 64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazzoni, A.; Marchesi, G.; Cadenaro, M.; Mazzotti, G.; Di Lenarda, R.; Ferrari, M.; Breschi, L. Push-out stress for fibre posts luted using different adhesive strategies. Eur. J. Oral Sci. 2009, 117(4), 447–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rathke, A.; Haj-Omer, D.; Muche, R.; Haller, B. Effectiveness of bonding fiber posts to root canals and composite core build-ups. Eur. J. Oral Sci. 2009, 117(5), 604–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pashley, D.H.; Tay, F.R.; Breschi, L.; Tjäderhane, L.; Carvalho, R.M.; Carrilho, M.; Tezvergil-Mutluay, A. State of the art etch-and-rinse adhesives. Dent. Mater. 2011, 27(1), 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khoroushi, M. , Hosseini-Aghdam, A., & Keshani, F. (2018). Effect of different cementation techniques on voids and bond strength of fiber posts. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 19(9), 1083-1089.
- Generali, L.; Veneri, F.; Forabosco, E.; Cavani, F.; Piergianni, V.; Sassatelli, P.; Checchi, V.; Pedullà, E. Push-out bond strength and SEM fractographical analysis of hollow fibre posts used with self-adhesive resin cement: a pilot study. Odontology 2024, 112(1), 158–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bovolato, L.; Tonini, R.; Boschi, G.; Cavalli, G.; Salgarello, S.A. Novel hollow fiber sandwich composite post system: mechanical characteristics. Minerva Stomatol. 2020, 69(2), 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lo Giudice, G.; Ferrari Cagidiaco, E.; Lo Giudice, R.; Puleio, F.; Nicita, F.; Calapaj, M. Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of a Hollow Endodontic Post by Three Point Test and SEM Analysis: A Pilot Study. Materials (Basel) 2019, 12(12), 1983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nezir, M.; Dinçtürk, B.A.; Sarı, C.; et al. Effect of fiber-reinforced direct restorative materials on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated mandibular molars restored with a conservative endodontic cavity design. Clin. Oral Invest. 2024, 28, 316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ozkan-Ata, S.; Ata, N.; Ugurlutan, R. Hyperbaric Pressure Effect On Dental Luting Cements. J. Basic Clin. Health Sci. 2023, 7, 464–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viotti, F.; Silva, A.F.; Andrade, G.S.; Santos, C.F.F.; Furlan, M.; Panzarini, S.R.; et al. Effect of dentin surface treatments on bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements to intraradicular dentin: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Oral Investig. 2021, 25(5), 2527–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bianco, E. Factors influencing immediate maxillary dental implant placement and bone resorption: a review of the literature and an outlook on the clinical possibilities. Dent. Med. Probl. 2016, 53(3), 408–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maoddi, P.; Bianco, E.; Letizia, M.; Pollis, M.; Manfredini, D.; Maddalone, M. Correlation between a Force-Sensing Oral Appliance and Electromyography in the Detection of Tooth Contact Bruxism Events. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(19), 5532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliveira, S.G.D.; Gomes, D.J.; Costa, M.H.N.; Sousa, E.R.; Lund, R.G. Coronal microleakage of endodontically treated teeth with intracanal post exposed to fresh human saliva. J. Appl. Oral Sci. 2013, 21(5), 403–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qamar, Z.; Abdul, N.S.; Kakti, A.; et al. Effect of photosensitizers on modulating bond strength of different luting cements used for cementation of resin modified composite fiber posts. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2022, 26(13), 4597–4605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Young, A. , & Tenuta, L. M. (2011). Initial erosion models. Caries research, 45 Suppl 1, 33–42. [CrossRef]





| X-ray source | sealed microfocus X-ray tube 20-90kV,25W |
|---|---|
| X-ray detector | 4000x2672pixels, 12bit, fiber optically coupled to scintillator |
| Scanning volume | 68mm diam., 20mm single scan length, 200mm scannable length |
| Spatial resolution | <9µm pixel size, <15µm low-contrast resolution (10%MTF) |
| Reconstructed slices | 8Kx8K pixels, 9µm/18µm/35µm selectable pixels size |
| Radiation safety | <1µSv/h at any point on the instrument surface during scanning |
| EMPTY CEMENT SPACES / EXTERNAL CEMENT VOLUME | % OF GAPS | EMPTY CEMENT SPACE | EXTERNAL CEMENT VOLUME | POST TYPE | N° |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0,0377 | 3,77% | 0,5980 | 158,300 | HP | 1 |
| 0,0227 | 2,27% | 0,2741 | 100,126 | HP | 2 |
| 0,0953 | 9,53% | 14,698 | 139,505 | HP | 3 |
| 0,0473 | 4,73% | 0,3655 | 73,448 | HP | 4 |
| 0,0424 | 4,24% | 0,1618 | 36,510 | HP | 5 |
| 0,0313 | 3,13% | 0,1150 | 35,528 | HP | 6 |
| 0,0151 | 1,51% | 0,0647 | 41,995 | HP | 7 |
| 0,0772 | 7,72% | 0,2975 | 35,559 | HP | 8 |
| 0,0576 | 5,76% | 0,2187 | 35,768 | HP | 9 |
| 0,0070 | 0,07% | 0,0317 | 44,804 | HP | 10 |
| 0,1946 | 19,46% | 14,290 | 73,413 | SP | 11 |
| 0,0391 | 3,91% | 0,2775 | 70,833 | SP | 12 |
| 0,2712 | 27,2% | 13,433 | 49,525 | SP | 13 |
| 0,2888 | 28,8% | 18,191 | 62,974 | SP | 14 |
| 0,2145 | 21,4% | 11,732 | 54,689 | SP | 15 |
| 0,1941 | 19,41% | 12,366 | 63,710 | SP | 16 |
| 0,1942 | 19,42% | 0,8721 | 44,895 | SP | 17 |
| 0,0543 | 5,43% | 0,3396 | 62,572 | SP | 18 |
| 0,1939 | 19,39% | 0,8282 | 42,698 | SP | 19 |
| 0,1085 | 10,85% | 12,342 | 113,717 | SP | 20 |
| POST LENGTH/POST SPACE LENGHT | POST SPACE LENGTH (mm) | POST LENGTH (mm) | POST TYPE | N° |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0,9826 | 7,729 | 7,595 | HP | 1 |
| 0,9923 | 8,22 | 8,157 | HP | 2 |
| 0,8838 | 7,148 | 6,318 | HP | 3 |
| 0,9595 | 9,059 | 8,693 | HP | 4 |
| 0,9393 | 8,247 | 7,747 | HP | 5 |
| 0,9199 | 8,372 | 7,702 | HP | 6 |
| 0,9841 | 8,478 | 8,344 | HP | 7 |
| 0,9635 | 8,577 | 8,264 | HP | 8 |
| 0,9575 | 8,416 | 8,059 | HP | 9 |
| 0,9877 | 7,979 | 7,881 | HP | 10 |
| 0,7615 | 8,157 | 6,212 | SP | 11 |
| 0,8150 | 8,541 | 6,961 | SP | 12 |
| 0,6459 | 8,594 | 5,551 | SP | 13 |
| 0,6097 | 7,639 | 4,658 | SP | 14 |
| 0,5285 | 8,273 | 4,373 | SP | 15 |
| 0,7116 | 8,39 | 5,971 | SP | 16 |
| 0,9858 | 7,069 | 6,696 | SP | 17 |
| 0,8528 | 8,246 | 7,033 | SP | 18 |
| 0,9529 | 7,783 | 7,417 | SP | 19 |
| 0,5663 | 8,362 | 4,736 | SP | 20 |
| Mann Whitney test | |
|---|---|
| P value | 0,0007 |
| Exact or approximate p value? | Exact |
| Significantly different (p< 0.05)? | Yes |
| One- or two-tailed p value? | Two-tailed |
| Sum of ranks in column A,B | 63 , 147 |
| Mann-Whitney U | 8 |
| Mann Whitney test | |
|---|---|
| p value | 0,0433 |
| Exact or approximate p value? | Exact |
| Significantly different (p < 0.05)? | Yes |
| One- or two-tailed pvalue? | Two-tailed |
| Sum of ranks in column A,B | 78 , 132 |
| Mann-Whitney U | 23 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).