Objectives An ideal endodontic sealer should bond to both dentin and root‐filling material. This study aimed to assess the push‐out bond strength (PBS) of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)‐Fillapex, Endoseal MTA, AH26, and Sure‐Seal Root to root dentin after root canal drying with different techniques. Materials and Methods This in vitro study was conducted on 160 extracted mandibular premolars. After root canal preparation, the teeth were randomly divided into four groups ( n = 40) of drying with ethanol, paper point, air vacuum, and control (wet canal). Each group was divided into four subgroups ( n = 10) for use of AH26, Sure‐Seal Root, MTA‐Fillapex, and Endoseal MTA sealers. The mean PBS was measured by a universal testing machine. The mode of failure was determined under a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed by the Kruskal–Wallis and Games–Howell tests. Results The maximum mean PBS was equally recorded in ethanol and paper point groups, and was significantly higher than that of control and air vacuum groups ( p < .001). In the use of AH26 sealer, the mean PBS in drying with ethanol was significantly higher than all other methods ( p < .05). The mean PBS in drying with a paper point was also significantly higher compared with control and air vacuum methods ( p < .05). In the use of Sure‐Seal, the mean PBS in drying with a paper point was significantly higher than other methods ( p < .05). The mean PBS in drying with ethanol was significantly higher than that in control and air vacuum methods ( p < .001). In the use of MTA‐Fillapex and Endoseal‐MTA, the technique of drying had no significant effect on PBS. Adhesive and mixed failures were the most common in all drying groups. Conclusions Drying with ethanol and paper point enhanced the PBS of sealers to root dentin.