Comparative Evaluation of Apical Sealing Ability of Different Root Canal Sealers

Altan, Halenur; Göztaş, Zeynep; İnci, Gülsüm; Tosun, Gül

doi:10.17096/jiufd.33871

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…22, Issue No. 1, 2022 (124-135) 131 produces rigid and strong polymer with collagens of dentin through mechanical bonding because of creep capacity (42) .…”

Section: In This Study Dye Penetrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Assessment of Root Canal Sealer’s Apical Sealing Ability

Alalaf¹,

Alkhalidi²

2022

RDENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims:To compare the apical sealing ability of TotalFill BC, AH Plus Jet, and GuttaFlow Bioseal sealers. Materials and Methods: Thirty single rooted mandibular premolars were decoronated and standardized at 15mm. The specimens were chemo-mechanically prepared, and randomized into three experimental groups (n =10) according to the root canal sealer tested: TotalFill BC, AH Plus Jet and, GuttaFlow Bioseal. The specimens were filled using single cone technique. The specimens were decalcified, dehydrated, and cleared. The specimens were analyzed by stereomicroscope, and digital images were captured using stereomicroscope attached camera. The apical dye leakage depth was measured and evaluated using four grade scoring system at 10X magnification. The apical micro leakage data among experimental groups were statistically analyzed by one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test and Fisher's exact test at 5% significance. Results: Statistically, there was no significant difference in apical micro leakage among the experimental root canal sealers. (P>.05) Conclusions: In this study, no experimented root canal sealer had perfect sealing ability. The experimental root canal sealers were similar in their sealing ability at apical area of root canal.

show abstract

“…22, Issue No. 1, 2022 (124-135) 131 produces rigid and strong polymer with collagens of dentin through mechanical bonding because of creep capacity (42) .…”

Section: In This Study Dye Penetrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Assessment of Root Canal Sealer’s Apical Sealing Ability

Alalaf¹,

Alkhalidi²

2022

RDENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After the excess material was eliminated using a hot instrument 1 mm below the access orifice, the samples were coronally sealed using glass ionomer cement. 19 Group II: GuttaFlow 2 sealer using a single cone technique The single cone approach (Gutta-percha points 40/06 + GuttaFlow 2) was utilized for the obturation operation. GuttaFlow 2 (manufactured by Coltène/Whaledent, Langenau, Germany, LOT No.…”

Section: Experimental Groupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro apical microleakage evaluation for different endodontic sealers by spectrophotometric analysis: an observational study

Mezaal

Abdulkareem²,

Shareef³

2022

F1000Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: It has been established that several filling techniques can affect apical leakage, which is responsible for 59% of endodontic failures. The primary goal of endodontic therapy is to create a tight seal that aids in repairing the periapical tissues, prevents apical periodontitis, and shields against root canal infection. The study aims to compare the apical sealing ability of epoxy resin based sealer (AH plus), which is an epoxy-resin-based root canal sealer, GuttaFlow 2, which is a silicone-based root canal sealer, GuttaFlow bioseal is a bioactive glass-based root canal sealer, TotalFill HiFlow bioceramic (BC) sealer is a silicate-based root canal sealer (bioceramic sealer) using a single cone technique by spectrophotometric analysis. Methods: This study chose 64 maxillary first molars with a straight palatal root. Following palatal roots sectioning to 11 mm from the root apex, the canals were instrumented up to size X4 using Protaper Next. They were separated into four experimental groups (n = 15) per each group based on the kind of sealer utilized, Group I: AH plus, Group II: GuttaFlow 2, Group III: GuttaFlow bioseal, Group IV: TotalFill BC HiFlow, and two control groups (n =2 for each). After completing obturation, the dye extraction technique was used to evaluate apical leakage. A spectrophotometer was used to measure the optical density of the solution after all the dyes were liberated from the interfacial regions. Result: A statistically non-significant difference between the investigated root canal sealers in apical microleakage P > 0.05 was noted. The highest mean values were observed in group IV (0.08046), group I(0.07731), and group II(0.06209), while the lowest mean value in group III (0.05719) Conclusions: All types of sealers used in this investigation showed various amounts of microleakage. None of the sealants could completely close the apical foramen to provide a fluid-tight seal.

show abstract

Comparative Evaluation of Apical Sealing Ability of Different Root Canal Sealers

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Comparative Assessment of Root Canal Sealer’s Apical Sealing Ability

Comparative Assessment of Root Canal Sealer’s Apical Sealing Ability

In vitro apical microleakage evaluation for different endodontic sealers by spectrophotometric analysis: an observational study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About