The effect of irrigation solutions on the apical sealing ability in different root canal sealers

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of three root canal irrigation solutions on the apical sealing ability of three root canal obturation materials: gutta-percha/AH plus or MM-seal and Resilon/ Epiphany SE. A total of 100 teeth with single straight root canals were randomly divided into three equal groups of 30 samples each, with the other 10 teeth (5 positive and 5 negative) used as controls. Each irrigation group was divided into three groups according to the use of three different root canal obturation materials (n = 10): Gutta-percha with AH plus or MM-seal, Resilon with Epiphany SE. The crowns were removed at the cementoenamel junction with a diamond disc under water coolant. The root canals were prepared using step-back technique and irrigation with either sodium hypochlorite (2.5%), chlorhexidine (2%), or MTAD solutions. The roots were obturated with lateral condensation technique using one of the obturation materials. The root surfaces was coated with two layer nail varnish (except apex), placed in 2% methylene blue dye solution, and centrifuged at 3,000 rpm for 5 minutes. Irrigation solutions affected the apical sealing ability of all the sealers. The chlorhexidine irrigation solution exhibited higher apical leakage values than did MTAD and NaOCl in all canal sealers, although the MTAD irrigation solution groups showed the least leakage values. The apical sealing ability of AH plus, Epiphany SE and MM-seal root canal sealers decreased when the chlorhexidine was used as an irrigation solution.

Evaluation of the physicochemical properties of silicone- and epoxy resin-based root canal sealers

“…6,13,14 MM-Seal (Micro-Mega, Besançon, France), a similar epoxy resin-based polymer, is composed of ethylene glycol salicylate, calcium phosphate, bismuth subcarbonate, and oxide components, thus presenting satisfactory physical and chemical properties of flow (FL) into lateral canals, RD, biocompatibility, and working time. Bodrumlu et al, 15 Bodrumlu et al, 5 and Poggio et al 16 reported that this root canal sealer has a bond strength comparable with that of AH Plus. However, no studies in the current literature provide an evaluation of its physicochemical properties.…”

“…Although gutta-percha combined with the sealer AH Plus remain the most widely used materials in the filling procedure; 1, 3,4,5,6,7,8,9 numerous techniques and materials with different physicochemical and biological properties have also been developed. 2,3,8,9,10 Root canal sealers can be classified according to their composition as zinc oxide and eugenol-based sealers; sealers containing calcium hydroxide; glass Rafael Verardino de CAMARGO (a) Yara Terezinha Corrêa SILVA-SOUSA (b) Rodrigo Presotto Ferreira da ROSA (a) Jardel Francisco MAZZI-CHAVES (a) Fabiane Carneiro LOPES (a) Liviu STEIER (c) Manoel Damião SOUSA-NETO (a) ionomer, epoxy resin, and methacrylate resin-based sealers; or bioceramic and silicone-based sealers 1,3,[7][8][9] .…”

“…As an epoxy resin-based sealer, AH Plus (Dentsply DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany) presents low solubility (SL) and disintegration, adequate radiopacity (RD), 1,3,4,5,7,8,9 high bonding strength to root dentin, 1,8,11,12 adequate expansion, 4,5 antimicrobial activity, and other desirable biological properties. 6,13,14 MM-Seal (Micro-Mega, Besançon, France), a similar epoxy resin-based polymer, is composed of ethylene glycol salicylate, calcium phosphate, bismuth subcarbonate, and oxide components, thus presenting satisfactory physical and chemical properties of flow (FL) into lateral canals, RD, biocompatibility, and working time.…”

“…1, 3,5,7,8,9,13,14,15,16,21,23 This result is likely due to the occurrence of slow polymerization between the epoxy resin amines and high-molecular weight molecules. Conversion of monomers into polymers occurs gradually.…”

Applying liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to assess endodontic sealer microleakage

“…Several methods aimed at detecting leakage have already been described in the literature, such as the conductometric technique, 2 fluid filtration, 3,4 radioisotopes, 5 bacterial penetration, 6 the electrochemical test, 7 and the use of dyes. 8,9 However, all these methods have yielded controversial results, and have therefore been widely criticized. 7,8,10,11 Some studies have presented improvements to leakage assessment methods.…”