Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Description of the study groups.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Composition and application mode of the used adhesives system.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 1.

Schematic representation of the two coronal slices, two middle slices and two apical slices obtained from fiber post cemented in root canal space.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 3.

Push-out bond strength values (mean ± standard deviation in MPa) of the tested groups.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Results of multiple comparisons by Tukey test.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 2.

Representative SEM images of the adhesive interface in the seven study groups at low and high magnifications.

a and A: OS/H, intimate adaptation with resin tag formation was observed; b and B: CSE/H, no gap was seen with few short and some fractured resin tags; c and C: CSE/ED, a well-adapted interface was found with homogenous compact resin tags; d and D: AB-Er/H, a well-formed interface was detected with numerous long resin tags; e, E: AB-Se/H, gap formation was revealed with no resin tags; f and F: AB-Se/ED, an adapted interface was detected with uneven resin tag formation; g and G: AB-Se/W, good adaptation was seen with resin tag formation.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Schematic representation showing the adhesion mechanism at the adhesive interface.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 5.

The length of resin tags (in μm) formed at the adhesive interface for the tested groups.

More »

Table 5 Expand