International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 9 , ISSUE 2 ( April-June, 2019 ) > List of Articles


Effect of Sandblasting on the Bond Strength between CAD–CAM Milled Metal Post and Direct Metal Laser-sintered Metal Post: A Comparative In Vitro Study

R Bharat Raj, GP Surendra Kumar

Keywords : Bond strength, Computer-aided design and computer-aided machining, Direct metal laser-sintering

Citation Information : Raj RB, Kumar GS. Effect of Sandblasting on the Bond Strength between CAD–CAM Milled Metal Post and Direct Metal Laser-sintered Metal Post: A Comparative In Vitro Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2019; 9 (2):56-62.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1232

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-10-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; The Author(s).


Aim: To assess and compare the bond strength of Co–Cr metal posts fabricated with 2 different techniques: computer-aided design and computer-aided machining (CAD–CAM) and direct metal laser-sintering (DMLS). Materials and methods: Sixty extracted noncarious, human maxillary central incisor teeth with a similar morphology were decoronated 2 mm coronal to the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) and the roots were endodontically treated. Post space was prepared leaving 5 mm of gutta percha within the root canal. Co–Cr metal posts were fabricated according to CAD–CAM and direct metal laser-sintering (DMLS) techniques and were randomly divided into four study groups: group I, CAD–CAM milled metal post without sandblasting; group II, DMLS metal posts without sandblasting; group III, CAD–CAM milled metal post with sandblasting; and group IV, DMLS metal posts with sandblasting. After sandblasting posts were cemented with glass ionomer cement, pull-out bond strength test was performed using a universal testing machine. Using Kruskal–Wallis with post hoc (Mann–Whitney) tests statistical analysis of data was performed. Result: The highest pull-out bond strength was reported in group-IV (mean value = 6.65 ± 3.10 MPa). And the lowest was recorded for group-I (mean value = 4.38 ± 2.69 MPa). No significant difference in pull-out bond strength was found among the different groups (p > 0.05) due to smaller sample size. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, results suggest that surface treatment with sandblasting with 50 μm aluminum oxide particles was found to be an effective method for improving the bond between the DMLS and CAD–CAM milled metal posts.

  1. Bilgin MS, Erdem A, et al. Comparison of fracture resistance between cast, CAD/CAM milling, and direct metal laser sintering metal post systems. J Prosthodont Res 2016;60(1):23–28. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2015.08.001.
  2. Barcellos RR, Correia DP, et al. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with intra-radicular post: the effects of post system and dentine thickness. J Biomech 2013;46(15): 2572–2577. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.08.016.
  3. Liu W, Qing H, et al. Internal adaptation of cobalt-chromium posts fabricated by selective laser melting technology. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121(3):455–460. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.03.017.
  4. Castillo Oyagüe R, Osorio R, et al. The effect of surface treatments on the microroughness of laser-sintered and vacuumcast base metal alloys for dental prosthetic frameworks. Microsc Res Tech 2012;75(9):1206–1212. DOI: 10.1002/jemt.22050.
  5. Park JS, Lee JS, et al. Comparison of push-out bond strength of fiber-reinforced composite resin posts according to cement thickness. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118(3):372–378. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.11.007.
  6. Al-Assar RM, El-Ghani OS, et al. Effect of relining, cement type, and thermocycling on push-out bond strength of fiber reinforced posts. Future Dent J 2015;1(1):13–22. DOI: 10.1016/j.fdj.2015.11.001.
  7. Stockton LW. Factors affecting retention of post systems: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81(4):380–385. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(99)80002-X.
  8. Zicari F, De Munck J, et al. Factors affecting the cement–post interface. Dent Mater 2012;28(3):287–297. DOI: 10.1016/
  9. Vertucci FJ. Root canal anatomy of the human permanent teeth. Oral Surg, Oral Med, Oral Pathol 1984;58(5):589–599. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(84)90085-9.
  10. Hudis SI, Goldstein GR. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth: A review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 1986;55(1):33–38. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(86)90068-5.
  11. Morgano SM, Milot P. Clinical success of cast metal posts and cores. J Prosthet Dent 1993;70(1):11–16. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(93)90030-R.
  12. Tamac E, Toksavul S, et al. Clinical marginal and internal adaptation of CAD/CAM milling, laser sintering, and cast metal ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112(4):909–913. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.020.
  13. Aleisa K, Al-dwairi ZN, et al. Pull-out retentive strength of fiber posts cemented at different times in canals obturated with a eugenol-based sealer. J Prosthet Dent 2016;116(1):85–90. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.010.
  14. Braga NM, Paulino SM, et al. Removal resistance of glass-fiber and metallic cast posts with different lengths. J Oral Sci 2006;48(1):15–20. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.48.15.
  15. Oblak C, Jevnikar P, et al. Fracture resistance and reliability of new zirconia posts. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91(4):342–348. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.01.009.
  16. Monticelli F, Osorio R, et al. Surface treatments for improving bond strength to prefabricated fiber posts: a literature review. Oper Dent 2008;33(3):346–355. DOI: 10.2341/07-86.
  17. Almufleh BS, Aleisa KI, et al. Effect of surface treatment and type of cement on push-out bond strength of zirconium oxide posts. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112(4):957–963. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.04.022.
  18. Younes AA, Kamel MS, et al. The effect of various fiber reinforced composite post surface treatments on its bond strength to root canal dentin. Tanta Dent J 2015;12:S15–S21. DOI: 10.1016/j.tdj.2015.05.011.
  19. Miller BH, Nakajima H, et al. Bond strength between cements and metals used for endodontic posts. Dent Mater 1998;14(5): 312–320. DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(98)00044-X.
  20. Silva GA, da Luz EC, et al. Influence of surface treatments on topography and bond strength of densely-sintered zirconium-oxide ceramic. Ceram Int 2016;42(7):8136–8139. DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2016.02.019.
  21. Lall S, Runu R. The effect of different cementation strategies on the pull-out bond strength of fiber post: an ex-vivo study. Int J Sci Rep 2016;2(4):68–73. DOI: 10.18203/issn.2454-2156.IntJSciRep20160995.
  22. Wang VJ, Chen YM, et al. Effect of two fiber post types and two luting cement systems on regional post retention using the push-out test. Dent Mater 2008;24(3):372–377. DOI: 10.1016/
  23. Lencioni KA, Menani LR, et al. Tensile bond strength of cast commercially pure titanium dowel and cores cemented with three luting agents. J Prosthodont Res 2010;54(4):164–167. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2010.03.002.
  24. Dastgurdi ME, Khabiri M, et al. Effect of post length and type of luting agent on the dislodging time of metallic prefabricated posts by using ultrasonic vibration. J Endod 2013;39(11):1423–1427. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.07.005.
  25. Quante K, Ludwig K, et al. Marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting technology. Dent Mater 2008;24(10):1311–1315. DOI: 10.1016/
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.