Capsulated versus hand-mixed glass-ionomer luting cements for post retention

Objectives: Glass-ionomer luting cements are supplied in two forms, as loose powder and liquid to be hand-mixed (HM) or pre-proportioned in a capsule to be mechanically mixed (MM). This study was to determine if post retention in pull-out tests was affected by the method of mixing the cement. Methods: Two hundred stainless steel posts of diameter 1.75 mm were cemented within post-channels prepared in stainless steel cylinders using two hand-mixed cements FJL and KCL (Fuji I Luting Cement and Ketac-Cem Luting Cement) and two capsulated cements FJC and KCM (Fuji Cap I and Ketac-Cem Maxicap). Three groups of test specimens were prepared. In Group I each cement was mixed as recommended by the manufacturer, Group II cements were placed within a capsule and mechanically mixed and in Group III cements were removed from the capsule and mixed by hand. Specimens were stored for l h at 37 °C and 100% humidity prior to post pull-out tests at a crosshead speed of 10 mm min−1. The maximum loads at failure were subjected to Weibull analysis and Mann—Whitney tests to determine probabilities of survival and significant differences between the groups. Results: Significant differences (P< 0.05) were found between all pairs of cements tested except KCM(MM) vs FJL(HM), FJL(MM) vs KCL(HM), KCL(MM) vs KCL(HM), FJC(HM) vs FJC(MM), KCL(MM) vs FJL(MM). Conclusions: The capsulated cements as supplied by the manufacturers are preferable to the equivalent hand-mixed formulations, as they give higher probabilities of survival when subjected to a given load. Both capsulated and hand-mixed formulations of Fuji had higher probabilities of survival compared to the corresponding Ketac cements. The probability of post survival can be altered by the method of mixing the cement.