This study evaluated comparatively the adhesion of Epiphany and AH Plus endodontic sealers to human root dentin treated with 1% NaOCl and 1% NaOCl+17% EDTA, using the push-out test. Sixty root cylinders obtained from maxillary canines had the canals prepared and were randomly assigned to 3 groups (n=20), according to root dentin treatment: GI - distilled water (control), GII - 1% NaOCl and GIII - 1% NaOCl+17% EDTA. Each group was divided into 2 subgroups (n=10) filled with either Epiphany or AH Plus. Bond strength push-out test data (kN) were obtained and analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc test. There was statistically significant difference between sealers (AH Plus: 0.78 +/- 0.13; Epiphany: 0.61 +/- 0.19; p<0.01) and among root dentin treatments (distilled water: 0.58 +/- 0.19; 1% NaOCl: 0.71 +/- 0.12; 1% NaOCl+17% EDTA: 0.80 +/- 0.17; p<0.05). In conclusion, AH Plus sealer presented greater adhesion to dentin than Epiphany, regardless of the treatment of root canal walls.

An increase in frequency, independent of power settings, of the lasers used in this study increased adhesion of an epoxy-based root canal sealer.

Except for 1% NaOCl, the removal of smear layer with the other irrigants increased the bond strength of AH Plus to intracanal dentine. The use of 1% NaOCl for 30 min with 17% EDTA as final irrigant for 5 min increased the bond strength of Epiphany.

The use of an adequate method for evaluation of the adhesion of root canal filling materials provides more reliable results to allow comparison of the materials and substantiate their clinical choice. The aims of this study were to compare the shear bond strength (SBS) test and push-out test for evaluation of the adhesion of an epoxy-based endodontic sealer (AH Plus) to dentin and guttapercha, and to assess the failure modes on the debonded surfaces by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Three groups were established (n=7): in group 1, root cylinders obtained from human canines were embedded in acrylic resin and had their canals prepared and filled with sealer; in group 2, longitudinal sections of dentin cylinders were embedded in resin with the canal surface smoothed and turned upwards; in group 3, gutta-percha cylinders were embedded in resin. Polyethylene tubes filled with sealer were positioned on the polished surface of the specimens (groups 2 and 3). The push-out test (group 1) and the SBS test (groups 2 and 3) were performed in an Instron universal testing machine running at crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Means (±SD) in MPa were: G1 (8.8±1.13), G2 (5.9±1.05) and G3 (3.8±0.55). Statistical analysis by ANOVA and Student's t-test (α=0.05) revealed statistically significant differences (p<0.01) among the groups. SEM analysis showed a predominance of adhesive and mixed failures of AH Plus sealer. The tested surface affected significantly the results with the sealer reaching higher bond strength to dentin than to guttapercha with the SBS test. The comparison of the employed methodologies showed that the SBS test produced significantly lower bond strength values than the push-out test, was skilful in determining the adhesion of AH Plus sealer to dentin and gutta-percha, and required specimens that could be easily prepared for SEM, presenting as a viable alternative for further experiments.

No abstract