Evolution of Post and Core Systems

PETER R. H U N T , BDS, MSc, LDSRCS ENC*

DUMITRU GOGARNOIU, DMDt

or many years the standard

artificial tooth structure in
dentistry was the post and core fabricated in cast gold.I2 This changed
in the late 1960s and early ~OS,
when dentists became enamored of
placing multiple pins to retain cores
of amalgam, in both vital and nonvital
This seemed simple,
fast, and effective. It was a onestage procedure, allowing many
teeth to be saved h a t previously
would have been condemned.
Often patients were told that these
buildups could serve well as a final
restoration, but if there were complications, such as the loss of more
tooth structure, then they could be
prepared down and used as the
foundation under a crown.
Actually, this was more easily said
than done. As the preparation was
performed, the pins within the core
often became exposed so that the
retention of the core to the pins
was weakened. In addition, preparation of the tooth structure below
the core often caused anchorage
for the pins in the dentin to be lost
because dentists naturally enough

tend to place pins to the outside of

the available tooth structure to
avoid pulpal penetration.
Although the cores initially seemed
stable and functional, as time went
on, it became apparent that adverse
affects were common. Fractures of
dentin around the pins occurred
freq~ently.~
Many pins were placed
into the pulp, some perforated into
the furcation region, and others
passed out into the periodontiurn.
Because six or more pins might be
placed in each tooth, the chances of
complications were high.
Even well-placed pins gave problems because microleakage around
them was high. Most dentists used
self-tapping pins, because these
were reported to give the greatest
retention. Knowing what we do
these days about dentin biology and
microleakage? it seems incredible
that one could ever believe that
drilling holes in dentin and filling
them with pins but without providing any form of seal around the
pins would survive over the long
term. Understandably, pulpal

problems were frequent as was

recurrent decay. Perhaps the most
dramatic problem was loss of the
core, complete with pins, because of
softening of the dentin in the pin
holes.
IMPACT OF RESIN COMPOSITE
SYSTEMS

The advent of resin composites

seemed to be a godsend for dentists
in many different ways; soon these
materials were used to make composite instead of amalgam cores.8-11
There was little need to contour
and place a matrix band deep subgingivally to gain isolation. The
core material could be applied
quickly; all that was needed was to
syringe the resin composite around
the post and down onto the tooth
structure. As the material was
invariably viscous, it was possible
to shape the core during the
application process, until the selfcure catalyzation process took over
to provide an instant core. The
core could be prepared for the final
crown almost immediately. Again,
the simplicity was deceptive.

Winicql Associate Professor,Dqpartment of Pctiodontics, School o f Dental Medicine, University of

Pennsyl#ania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
tClinicol Assistant Profeswr, Department of Restorative Dentis% School of Dental Medicine,
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Dweloped from a paper presented at the 2nd lntemational Symporivm on Ghrs lonomers.
Phikddphia;~Jwnr1995.
74

I996

The problem with resin composite

was applying it to the tooth
structure. Voids were inherent in
the self-cured composites, which,
being sticky and viscous, were hard
to compact; it was particularly difficult to be sure that material
wetted the post and the tooth
interface. At that time bonding
to dentin was unheard of. In addition, with the early resin composites there was considerable
shrinkage on setting, which tended
to pull the material away from the
tooth structure. These materials
were also relatively flexible and
micromovement of the core served
only to exacerbate microleakage
problems a t the interface between
the core and the tooth structure.
Failure was often abrupt and catastrophic. The core would
frequently break off at the tooth
interface, leaving a fractured post
that was difficult, if not impossible, to remove from the canal. In
addition, caries was usually present
on the tooth structure. Salvage was
difficult, often impossible.
Essentially, what had happened
was that the microleakage at the
interface had led to softening of
the tooth structure. This allowed
increased flexion of the core with
subsequent work hardening and
fracture of the post.
In recent times, instead of using a
cast post made from an impression
of the post chamber, there has been
increasing use of one-stage systems
using pre-made posts.12 Most of
these posts are of nonprecious
materials, such as stainless steel. At

first, these were cemented somewhat haphazardly into the

available post chamber. Obviously,
where the post touched tooth
structure there was little or no
cement, but in other areas there
was an excess. The cement was the
weak link in the system. To gain
greater retention, screw-in posts
were soon advocated. Systems
where a precision drill shaped the
canal to accommodate the post followed. In some systems, the post
canal was threaded as well.
However, the inherent risk of tapping holes and threading posts i n t o
dentine is that stresses arc set up in
the residual tooth structure that
may lead to later root fracture..
Before long, the most common
technique was to drill precision
channels that would receive niatching cemented posts. This was
reasonably stress free and allowed J
small amount of the relatively weak
cement between the post and the
tooth structure. Whereas there were
subtle differences between the various posts, such as shape, surface
finish, and texture,*-- there was
one overwhelmingly similar factor:
in cross-section, they were all
round. This meant that if there
were no antirotational components
built into the core or the crown,
then the stresses on the crown of
the tooth were thrown onto the
cement interface around the smalldimension post.* Often the crown,
core, and post separated, but the
clinician at least had the crown and
the post in his hand rather than
having the post fractured off at gum

level. Unfortunately, the response of

most clinicians was to re-cement the
post, without any change of design.
Usually, the scenario repeated itself.
Invariably, the posts used with these
systems were cemented with the
strongest cement available at that
time - zinc phosphate. The relatively high failure rate led to a
search for a stronger cement. In
recent years, there have been
attempts to use resin-based
cements, dentine bonding, and posts
with special finishes suitable for
resin bonding.*i Resin cements,
however, arc relatively viscous, full
of voids, and tend to retract from
the tooth structure o n curing.?.
The posts used with these cements
tend to be of relatively narrow
diameter, because it is difficult to
fully seat a well-fitting post using
the viscous resin cements. However,
a larger volume of cement in the
canal allows for more shrinkage of
the dilute resin cement systems.
Bonding to the tooth structure is
not strong enough to resist the
shrinkage stresses in the setting
resin system. The resultant voids at
the dentin interface may lead to
recurrent caries. In addition, the
core may fit poorly at the interface
with the tooth because resin core
systems are difficult to adapt to the
surface. The tooth structure may
soften, throwing all the loads on the
core directly onto the post. This
process may be accentuated by a
softening of the resin composite
system, which occurs because of
hydrolysis and the relatively low
conversion potential of the dual

VOLlIMt

(I.

NllMRER 2

75

J O U R N A L OF E S T H E T I C DENTISTRY

Evolution of Post and Core Systems

Figure I . Design failure of a direct anterior post and core complex. A, A threaded post bas been cemented into a canal
prepared with a precision drill. However, there is little or no inherent antirotational resistance. B, A glass ionomer core
material has been adapted around the post. C, Such materials are easy to prepare and refine intraorally However, the core
material is too weak and too little supported by the post to survive for long in the demanding intraoral environment.
D, The core fractured before the final crown wus inserted.

cure material. The post, being of

relatively small diameter, is more
susceptible to fracture.
This leads to one of the most exciting challenges that a clinician can
face: the need to drill out a post
fractured off at gum level. The post
is very hard. The drill skids off the
top of the post and buries itself in
the cement and the tooth alongside. If it proves possible to get the
post out, the new post chamber is
rutted, ledged, and perhaps even
perforated.

Some clinicians even recommend

not using any post; instead, they
seek to use resin composite alone as
the core and post.1J3 Considering
the inherent problems of packing
the resin material, shrinkage of the
resin, weakness of the final system,
and flexibility of the core, one
should be careful about case selection for use of "all-composite"
cores. For example, one might not
choose to use this system to restore
a thin lateral incisor or a ribbonehaped first premolar where there
will be little bulk of material.

Given all the problems, some disillusion with composite core

systems is understandable. Perhaps
this explains the recent popularity
of glass ionomer cores.
INTRODUCTION OF GLASS
IONOMER CEMENTS

Glass ionomer materials seem

almost ideal for cementing the post,
being relatively strong, inherently
adhesive, and resistant to recurrent
caries2' They wet tooth structure
readily, making for a more voidfree and safer interface between
post, core, and tooth structure.

Certain formulations, using silver

and amalgam admixtures, have
been used widely as core materials
(Figure l ) . r s
IJnfortunately though, the simplicity
is deceptive. Although traditional
glass ionomers may be suitable for
post cementation and use at the
interface, they generally are too
weak for the core itself. Fractures of
glass ionomer cores, irrespective of
the brand used, are all too common.
In retrospect, such problems should
have been anticipated. Although
there have been claims that one traditional glass ionomer is slightly
stronger or tougher than another, all
the conventional glass ionomers are
significantly weaker than the materials used for resin composite or
amalgam cores.z6z*The fracture
toughness figures for glass ionomers
are about one fourth those for resin
composites.
The traditional glass ionomer materials are also weaker than
desirable in terms of dentin bonding. However, with both glass
ionomers and resin composite systems, bonds should be considered
only as a supplement to retention
rather than as the prime retentive
mechanism. The newer resin hybrid
glass ionomers may allow for some
reevaluation of these principles,
because they are so much stronger
than the conventional materials.
However, before discussing their
impact, some basic discussion of
design principles and requirements
for posts and cores is indicated.

R AT1 0 N A L D E S I G N IK I N <:111. E S
F O R POS1S A N I ) (:()RE$

N o matter which cement or core

material is used, there are certain
design principles that need to be
followed. Prime objectives include:
1. A sealed interface between the
restoration and the tooth structure, both down the post
chamber and under the core. It is
preferable that the luting material should bond to the tooth and
prevent recurrent caries.
2. Adequate retention, preferably
not gained solely from the post
but also from the core. Tooth
structure can and should be
retained, providing it has sufficient bulk and strength.

3 . Inherent antirotation of the

post and core complex.

4. Minimal stressing of the residual tooth structure in

preparation, post insertion, or
postoperative function.

5. Negligible interference with

preparation and restoration of
the final crown complex.
6. Inherent resistance to catastrophic failures, such as
fracture of the tooth, caries
down the post chamber, gross
fracture of the core, or fracture
of the post at the tooth level.
SYSTEM ANALYSIS

Each system can be analyzed in

four regions: within the root, at the
core-tooth interface, within the
core, and as part of the final crown
restoration.

Within the Root

Whatever post system is used, it
should have adequate length and
strength and should fit the canal
well. With direct systems this
means using a precision-drilled and
matched-post system. This minimizes the volume of cement, void
formation, and cement shrinkage,
while ensuring that the cement is
placed under minimal functional
stress. High-viscosity cements are
contraindicated as it is almost
impossible to control shrinkage
and voids within the cement or a t
the interface, and high residual
stresses are likely to be set up in
the tooth structure.
The post should be of wrought
fibrous structure rather than of cast
metal, which, being equiaxed and
potentially porous, is inherently
weaker. Cast posts are also likely to
have small casting blips that prevent full seating of a post.? The
current trend to reduction in post
diameter, to allow room for more
cement, is potentially dangerous,
because it increases the potential for
post fracture. Many of the metals
currently used for posts are selected
because of their inherent potential
adhesiveness to resin-based
cements. However, because the area
for bonding is so minimal and the
potential stresses on the bond are
high, this bonding action is relatively unimportant. Macromechanical retention is still needed.
In addition, some modern, nonprecious posts are particularly
susceptible to work hardening and
subsequent fracture.

VOLUME U . N U M B E R 2

77

J O U R N A L OF ESTHETIC DENTISTRY

Evolution of Post and Core Systems

Precision-drilled post preparations

work well where there is minimal
flare to the canal. In blunderbuss
canals, a custom post, or at least a
combination of a precision-drilled
section at the apical aspect and a
custom fit at the coronal aspect, is
required. A precision-drilled post
chamber facilitates removal of all
the temporary cement from the
canal before the post is tried in.
At the Core-Tooth Interface
After the post preparation is complete, attention must be paid to the
root surface. This is the most critical yet neglected part of the
process. An inadequate fit here,
combined with microleakage,
rapidly leads to softening of the
tooth structure. These problems
can be accentuated if stresses on
the core work the interface.
Many of these stresses come from
designs that provide little or no
antirotational effect. All the forces
on the core combine to shear
cement bonds on the post.
Most of these problems can be
eliminated by designing an eccentric trough around the outside of
the post canal. This need be only
2 mm deep. It serves as a powerful
antirotation device, dramatically
increases surface area for retention
of the post and core, dissipates
forces over the whole tooth surface
rather than concentrating them in
the post canal, and acts as a stepdown device, strengthening the
danger region for post fracture.

For indirect systems, this eccentric

trough needs to have a path of
withdrawalhertion corresponding to that of the post. For direct
systems, the trough can be inherently locking and retentive.
Bonding and sealing the interface
within the trough and down the
post increase its strength.
Within the Core
The core material must be strong
enough to withstand the forces on
it. Rigidity is also important. If the
dentin flexes more than the core,
then all the stress will fall on the
core with potentially adverse
effects. Equally, if the core flexes,
then all the strain will be thrown
onto the cement union between the
crown and the small part of the
preparation apical to the core, so
that the seal of the crown in this
region is easily broken. Although it
would be almost impossible to
match a core with a particular
tooth in terms of flexion potential,
it would seem better to err toward
a core material that is more rigid
than one that is more flexible.
It is critical that the post and the
core are well united and that the
post does not tend to weaken the
core unduly.27This is usually
achieved by some form of webbing,
notching, or flattening of the post.
These designs should not impede
the adaptation of the core material;
voids weaken the core.3oThe core
should be neither too hard nor too
soft.One that is too hard will take
too long to prepare; one that is too

soft will readily become ledged and

rutted. Again, a material that
matches dentin would seem to be
the ideal for which to aim, as
would a material that, when prepared intraorally, does not
impregnate itself into the gingiva,
giving rise to a gingival tattoo.
Other factors concern the final
crown. Obviously, the smaller the
dimension of the core, the more
potential there is to develop the
desirable esthetics of the final
crown. With the increasing use of
all-porcelain systems there may be
some rationale for tooth-colored
cores.
As Part of the Final Crown
The final crown should have a
preparation design tha-t encapsulates and grips down onto the
external surface of the tooth: the
ferrule effect. This contains the
tooth structure and reduces the
inherent root splitting effect of a
post. It dramatically enhances
retention and is the most effective
means of providing antirotation.
The classic rule of thumb is that 1
to 2 mm of tooth structure all
around the tooth should be available below the margin of the core.
Frequently, the sound tooth structure for this ferrule will need to be
obtained by periodontal crown
lengthening procedures or tooth
eruption procedures or both.
Preparation designs that provide
for a shoulder on tooth structure
and an axial preparation on a core
have little or no ferrule effect.

Figure 2.

Direct posterior post and core comp1.x. A. I.ittli7 sound tooth structure remains after root canal therapy. Posts
in the canals with glass ionomcr
wmant. It is drffcult to isolate the ent~ironmmtand to adapt any dirc1c.t placcmetit core material. C, Glass ionomcir material
has been adapted around the posts and built up to form the core. I>, Once set, the core can be refined and shaped as
wessary. In this situation, although the core material is relatiiwly weak, its bulk gives greater strength. The shapt of the
preparation at the gingival reflects the anatomy of the tooth in that region.
w e d to

be placed according t o the angulatrons of the canals. R. Posts h a w been secured

C 1. I N I C A L P R 0 C E D U R ES

The principles outlined above suggest three main techniques: direct,

semidirect, and indirect.
Direct Technique
After softening and removing of the
root canal filling to a suitable depth,
the post chamber is prepared with
Peeso reamers, which tend to follow
the root canal filling rather than to
cut their own channel (Figure 2).-
A corresponding parallel-sided precision drill, adapted for safety

reasons to hand-held, rather than

engine-driven use, is then employed.
The largest size drill that does not
unduly weaken the tooth is used.

1 mm of clearance around the outside of the post is given, to allow

room for packing or injection of
the core material.

In a normal situation, without a

blunderbuss, an eccentric trough
around the post canal, about 2 rnm
deep, is prepared. The shape of the
trough depends on the individual
clinical situation. A canine would
have an ovoid trough, a premolar a
more elliptical one, depending on
the shape and size of the root at
that level. Where possible, at least

In a blunderbuss situation, only an

apical preparation is made. The
coronal portion of the canal is
filled with a small-particle hybrid
resin composite. N o attempt is
made to bond this to the dentin.
Indeed, it is essential that this can
be withdrawn attached to the post.
This composite is then supercured.

V O L l l M F It. N U M U E R 2

79

J O U R N A L OF E S T H E T I C D E N T I S T R Y

Evolution of Post and Core Systems

Figure 3. Indirect anterior post and core systems. A, On the left is the first stage of a post for a large canal. N o further
weakening of the tooth by additional canal preparation is indicated. Acrylic resin has been adapted around a wrought gold
post. There is inherent antirotational resistance. On the right is the more normal situation. A wrought gold post has been
placed into a precision-drilled canal. An eccentric trough at the orifice of the canal has been filled with acrylic rqin which then
merges into the core. This trough gives considerableadded retention, effective antirotational resistance, and strength to the
postlcore complex. B, The acrylic portions have been replaced by cast gold. When fitting these posts, care must be taken to
ensure that all temporary cement in the canal has been removed. This is more easily achieved with the post on the right,
because the original drill for the canal preparation can be used to remove the cement.

The post is cemented with a resin

hybrid glass ionomer cement, care
being taken not to allow the
cement to build up in the eccentric
trough. A resin-based dentin-bonding agent is applied to the tooth
structure. A small-particle, heavily
filled, hybrid, light-curing composite is then built up incrementally.
Once formed, the core is irradiated, and an additional layer of
bonding agent is applied, primarily
to seal the core-tooth interface.
With this technique the trough can
have natural undercuts. This
process may be more time consuming than using core materials from
most companies. These products
are usually partly if not completely
ptocuring, have relatively high
porosity, fit poorly at the interface,
and are relatively flexible.

80

1996

Semidirect Technique
In the semidirect technique, the
post is placed in the canal, releasing
agent is placed in the eccentric
trough, and light-curing composite
is adapted in stages and cured.
Once cured and shaped, the core
and the master post to which it is
attached are removed. This allows
for additional extraoral supercuring of the resin composite by more
intense light irradiation. The whole
post and core can then be cemented
into place with a resin hybrid glass
ionomer cement. This will ensure
that a glass ionomer material is
always between the post and core
and the dentin, providing good
caries protection in the region most
susceptible to breakdown.
Indirect Technique
Where a stronger post and core
system is required, there is still no

substitute for a cast core and

wrought post system (Figure 3).
After the post and trough preparation is made, the wrought gold
post is fitted to the post hole.
Cold-curing acrylic resin is painted
into the trough and allowed to
cure. As curing commences, the
post is carefully removed and
gently repositioned, ensuring that
on completion the post and core
buildup will be able to be removed.
The shape of the final core is then
added with more acrylic resin
before it is refined by high-speed
drills. The core and post are then
removed and the core is sprued
and cast. Although there will be no
chemical link between the core and
the post, physical retention will be
sufficient. The final post and core
can be cemented with glass
ionomer cement.

tl I 1 N l AN I1

(.0(a

AK N 0 1I 1

Figure 4. lndirect posterior post and core complex. A, Even

dfter a crown-lengthening procedure there is little remaining
tooth structure with which to work. The three canals have
heen prepared for posts. The large distal post has been
designated as the master canal. B, Trial seating of the post and
core complex. The two mesial canals can be approached
through the core. C, Trial seating of the accessory posts. Posts
must be left long, otherwise it may be impossible to remove
them. D, Cementation of the whole complex using glass
Iwomer cement. The core with master post is cemented first,
and then the accessory posts are placed before the cement has
time to set. I f time is not sufficient, then cement the main post
m d core first, while making sure that the accessory post
rcxions are kept clear. These can then be secured secondarily.
E. The final post and core complex.

If there are two or three canals in a

tooth then the system is much the
same except that one canal is designated as the master or primary
canal (Figure 4). The trough or
chamber is prepared to allow for
the same path of withdrawal as for
the master post. The other canals
are prepared for post placement at

a different angle. Smooth plastic

posts treated with a releasing agent
are placed into these secondary
canals. The master gold post is
placed into the master canal. Resin
is placed into the chamber up to the
occlusal portion. AS it sets, the secondary posts are rotated to break
any seal. They can be removed to

check that the master post and the

resin in the chamber can be
removed. They are all then
replaced, and the buildup of the
core is completed. The accessory
posts are rotated to ensure that they
will release as the material sets.

V O I . U M E R. NUMBER 2

81

J O U R N A L OF E S T H E T I C DENTISTRY

Evolution of Post and Core Systems

a crown that has fractured off or

have fracture toughness measurements that compare favorably with decayed through at gum level. The
those for posterior ~ o m p o s i t e s . 2 ~ *crown
~ * ~ ~may be satisfactory, the fit
Even more important, they seem to at the margin reasonable; all that is
be the dental material with physical needed is a post and core to link
properties most closely matched to the existing crown to the root. This
is not easy with current systems.
dentin. This means that a larger,
Indirect techniques rarely fit well
and hence stronger, post could be
and are time consuming. Direct
cemented with a hybrid glass
ionomer luting cement. Voids at the methods using resin composites are
interface, shrinkage, and the poten- also difficult because one needs to
put core paste material into the old
tial for recurrent caries in the post
crown,
which is then placed over
chamber should then be minimal.
the new post in the tooth stump.
Releasing agent needs to be put in
The hybridhonomer materials can
the crown first, to allow the crown
also be used directly. An eccentric
to be removed, because some
shallow trough with physical
sizing down of the new core is
undercuts should be used to miniusually
necessary to allow the old
mize any strain on dentin bonds.
crown to fit as it did previously.
The initial injection of the glass
The
viscosity and particle size of
ionomer should be around the post
CURRENT STATUS A N D FUTURE
and into the trough. These materi- the composite core materials are
PROSPECTS
als flow well, so it is relatively easy what make the full seating of the
Because of their strength limitato wet the interface at the post and crown impossible. Besides, comtions, currently, the only sensible
posite core materials do not make
at the tooth surface. This initial
use of the conventional glass
good luting cements.
layer should be cured as thorionomer cements seems to be as a
oughly as possible by light
luting material for the post and at
Resin hybrid glass ionomer
activation, to develop the best
the interface between the core and
corekement
materials provide a
bond and seal to the dentin.
the tooth structure. Even then, the
solution. The post is cemented
Although manufacturers may give
posdcore design should be planned
first,
taking care to ensure that
instructions about carefully layerto reduce stresses on the cement
there is clearance for the crown.
ing-in the material, and curing
union as much as possible. If glass
The crown is then cemented with a
each increment, there is no doubt
ionomer is used as a core, there
large bulk of corekement material,
that clinicians feel more comfortmust be a large amount of remainable with a material they can inject which should flow out well enough
ing tooth structure. This means that in bulk. It may not be too much of
at the margins to ensure a good fit
the material is being used less as a
and the previous occlusion. The
a nuisance to light-cure the mater..core and more as a block-out.
instant core that is formed is relaial at the top of the core;
tively strong and durable.
nevertheless, there is still a major
An alternate route may hold more
Obviously, the material has to be
need for a full self-cure reaction in
potential. The new hybridhonomer the body of the core. This would
completely self-curing.
materials may represent a signifibp particularly important for one
cant advance in post and core sysof the more frustrating situations
tems. Some of these new materials
in clinical dentistry: the tooth with

The core is then shaped to final

dimensions, removed, and sprued
as above. When the core is
invested, it is essential to ensure
that investment goes all the way
down the holes in the core left
from the removal of the accessory
posts. Otherwise, ceramic rods are
used. When cast, these holes
should be reamed out with drills to
ensure that the posts can pass
through the core. The completed
master post and core should then
be tried back in the mouth. One
needs to check that the accessory
posts pass through the holes in the
core and down into the canals.
Once fit is ensured, cementation
with a glass ionomer luting cement
can be carried out.

HUNT AND GOGARNOILI

su M M A R Y
Post and core systems have evolved
dramatically over the past few
years. Some procedures based on
the use of resin-composite systems
seem destined for failure in the
long term. New glass ionomer
based systems, employing resin
hybrid materials should give rise to
fewer complications and prove
simpler to use. Nevertheless, intelligent case selection and the
application of sound basic design
principles are required to make the
best use of any system.

9.

.
7

H T . Pins. d i > i c d s ,
and other retentive devices in posterior
teeth. Dent Clin North A m 199.3;

Jacohi R , Shillinghurg

foundations for errdodontically trratrd

trefh.J Prosthrt Dcnt 197.1: .?O:Rl6-819.

UL. Cauulbri J .
1.eplry JU. Prefahricated dou~els:a
litrraturr reiuru, J Prosthrt Dent 198.3;
4 9:4 98-503.

12 Deutsch AS. Musikant

1 3 Felton DA. Wrhh E L . Kanoy UF., Dugow

I . Threadrd rtidodonti[. douwls: e f f k t of
post design on iticidrticr of root fracture.
I lrosthet Drnt 1991; 65:179-187.
14 ~ e l & r / JAS, Cai~allariJ , Musibant- B L , ct
a/. Root fracture and t h e design of
prrfabri<-atrdposts. .I P r i ~ s t h r tl h i t
1987; .73:6.37-640.

I6

Collr? 17: Hontpsoti t11.. 1.rhtti~~n

ML.
R e t r r i t i i v i i ~ post
f
cmulris: an assessment
of the rrlutiuc rfftmw<--yof p o s t s of
diffrrent shapcs and sr;es. U r Drnt J
I 968; 124:h.I-hO.

Stundlrr JP, Caputo AA. Hurison EC.

Retcntion of enclodontic dtruds: cffirts
o / cemmt, d o u d length. drunictrr, urid
drsign. J Prosthrt Ilrrit I Y78:
.39:401-40.r.

17 Sormsrn ] A . Martinoff J T Clinrrall~

Markley MR. Pin reinforced and

retention of amalgam foundations and
restorations. J A m Dent Assol. 19-78;
56:6 7.7-6 79.

4.

r.

Going R E . Pin retained amalgam. J Ani

Dent Assoc 1966; 7.361 9-624.
Webb EL, Straka WI: Phillips CL. Tooth
crazing associated with threaded pins: a
three-dimensional model. J lrosthet Dent
1989; 61:624-628.

6.

Eriksen H M , Buonocore MG. Marginal

leakage with different composite
restorative materials in vitro: effect o f
cavity design. J Oral Rehabil 1976;

significant factors iri iJouwI design.

Irosthct 1)tvit 1984; F.?:28- 17.
18 Ilcmmirrgs K W . King A . Sctchcll I)].
Krsistarirr t o torsiotiul f o r r r s o/ iarious

prst and rore designs. J Prosthrt Dent

1YYl; 66:.32.7-.32Y.
19 Assif

D , Ferber A . Krtrntion

of

douwls

using a compositr rcsiri us a cementing

medium. J Prosthet Drnt lYX2;
48:292-2%.
20. Goldman M, DeVitrr R. White R ,

Nathanson D. An S E M study ofposts

cemented with an unfillrd rrsin. J Dent
Res 1984; 63:1003-1005.

3:315-322.
7.

Pashley DH. Clinical correlations o f

dentine structure and function. J Prosthet
Dent 1991: 66777-781.

8.

Frederick DR.An application of the

dowel and composite resin core
techniques. ] Prosthet Denr 1974;
33:420-424.

KC.

Staridler JP. D o u d retentron with glass

ionomer cement. J Prosthet Dent 1979:
2.5. McLeati J W, Gussrr 0 . Glass-cermet
cements. ~)itintrssoirrInt 1 W T :
.7:.3.3.3-.34.3.

1 1 Sterlr GD. Reinforced composite rrsin

3 7(.3):.167-3 90.
3.

24. Krupp J D , Caputo AA. Trahert

41: 16.3-1 66.

10 Stab/ C;J, ONeal RU. The compositr

rrsin dowel and corc. J Prosthrt Dent
1975; 3.3:642-648.

17

R E F E R KNCES
I . Trabert KC. Cooriey JI. Thr
rndodontic~allytreated tooth: r(vtoratiiw
concepts and trrhniques. Ilerit Clin
North A m 1984: 28(4):023-951.

Spanauf A]. Dowel and core foundations

using the composite Adaptic.
Quintessence Int 1 972; 4:49-S1.

21. Davidson Cl, Van Zeghhroeck I., Feilzer

A]. Destructivr stresses in adhesive luting
cements. J Dent Res 1991: 70:8RO-XX2.
22. Van Zeghhroeck I.. Bond capacity ( ~ f

adhesiiw luting cemrnts. PhD thrsis,

University of I.ouvain. 1 9x9.

2 6 . Kao t;C. Fracturr resistunre of p i n

retained amalgam. ronrpositc, rcsiti, and
alb>jr-reinforcedglass icinr~mrrcore
materials. J Prosthet Drnt I99 I ;
66:463-471.
27. Millstein PI.. /to I , Nathunsori I ) .
R r t r t i f i o n b e t u w n a serrated sterl doicJrl
und diffcrrrit c-ore niarcrials. 1 Prosthet

1)cnt 1991; 6.7:480-482.

18. Lloyd CH. Rutchart L X M . Thc rctrnriori

i ~ corc
f
composit~s:glass ionomers arid
crrmets h y u self-threading dentin pin:
thr influrnc-e of frtrcturr toughness upon

/ailurc. Dent Muter I 990; 6 : 18.5-1 88.

19, M o r g a n o SM. Milor 1. C/iriic-a/sucirss of
Lust rneral posts utrd rorix 1 Irtrsthrt

Dent 199.3; 7 0 : l l - 1 0 .
3 0 . (;hung W-C. Millstritr PI.. Effect of
dcsrrw ( J / trrihbricatcd oost heads o r i

3 I . Gordon Fl.. Post prepurutions: a

compurisori of thrrc systrms. J M i c h
A s s o i I 982; 64:.30.3-.304.

1)etit

-32. GrgauffA(;. Kerb? Ht. Kosetrstril S l : A

romparatii~cstudy of post / > r r / > a r a / i o t i
lfiamctrrs arid d c i k t i o n s using para-post
arid Gates ( ; l i d d m drills. J Endod 1988;
14: 377-.180.
11. ffadix J K , Muttison G I ) . Schiclmati CA.

et ul. Post preparation trihruqui!s and

their effrrt on thr apical s e a / . J Prosthet
Dent I 9y0;04:.r1.7-.719.
.34. Conroic? G. Rurgrss J O , Cronin K j .
Kaiser DJ. Dimensional stability o f threr

core materials rrstored with cast crowns.

J Dcnf Res 1 99 1: 7 2 2 16. (Abstr)
-1.r. Lattner M J . Norling 0 , Kaiser DJ.
Fracturr resistance o f four core materials
restored with cast crowns. ,1 Dent Kes
199.3; 72:41 I . (Ahstr)

Rrprint rrqursts: Prter Hunt, 266 South 2 1st

Strcrt. Philadi~l/ihia,PA 19103
01 996 Derkrr Perrodiruls

2 3. Trope M , Maltz DO, Trotistad I..

Resistance to fracture ofrestorrd

endodontically treated trrth. Kndod Ilrrir
Traumato/ 1985; 1:108-111.

V O L U M F . ti. N U M B E R 2

83