In vitro comparison of bioceramic and silicone-based root canal sealers with different obturation technique.

R Chelja, Vanita D Revankar, Yadav Chakravarthy, G Aarthi, Assmee Mohammed Noon
{"title":"<i>In vitro</i> comparison of bioceramic and silicone-based root canal sealers with different obturation technique.","authors":"R Chelja, Vanita D Revankar, Yadav Chakravarthy, G Aarthi, Assmee Mohammed Noon","doi":"10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_175_25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aims to evaluate and compare the apical sealing ability of different obturation techniques using bioceramic and silicone-based root canal sealers in an <i>in vitro</i> setting.</p><p><strong>Materials and methodology: </strong>Twenty-five extracted mandibular premolars were standardized to 15 mm root length and instrumented using ProTaper Universal Ni-Ti rotary files. The samples were randomly divided into five groups (<i>n</i> = 5) based on the obturation technique and sealer used. Group 1 and Group 2 were obturated using thermoplasticized gutta-percha with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) Fillapex and Ceraseal, respectively. Group 3 and Group 4 utilized bioceramic gutta-percha with MTA Fillapex and Ceraseal, respectively. Group 5 employed single-cone obturation (SCO) with GuttaFlow 2. Apical microleakage was assessed using methylene blue dye penetration, and measurements were analyzed under a stereomicroscope at ×20 magnification using ImageJ software. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All groups exhibited varying degrees of apical leakage. Group 5 (GuttaFlow 2 with SCO) demonstrated the lowest mean leakage (0.87 ± 0.26 mm), whereas Group 1 (thermoplasticized gutta-percha with MTA Fillapex) had the highest leakage (2.66 ± 0.61 mm) (<i>P</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although none of the sealers completely prevented apical leakage, GuttaFlow 2 with SCO exhibited the most effective sealing ability. The findings suggest that silicone-based sealers may provide enhanced apical sealing in root canal therapy. Further studies with larger sample sizes and clinical validation are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":516842,"journal":{"name":"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics","volume":"28 6","pages":"527-531"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12178558/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_175_25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: This study aims to evaluate and compare the apical sealing ability of different obturation techniques using bioceramic and silicone-based root canal sealers in an in vitro setting.

Materials and methodology: Twenty-five extracted mandibular premolars were standardized to 15 mm root length and instrumented using ProTaper Universal Ni-Ti rotary files. The samples were randomly divided into five groups (n = 5) based on the obturation technique and sealer used. Group 1 and Group 2 were obturated using thermoplasticized gutta-percha with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) Fillapex and Ceraseal, respectively. Group 3 and Group 4 utilized bioceramic gutta-percha with MTA Fillapex and Ceraseal, respectively. Group 5 employed single-cone obturation (SCO) with GuttaFlow 2. Apical microleakage was assessed using methylene blue dye penetration, and measurements were analyzed under a stereomicroscope at ×20 magnification using ImageJ software. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA (P < 0.05).

Results: All groups exhibited varying degrees of apical leakage. Group 5 (GuttaFlow 2 with SCO) demonstrated the lowest mean leakage (0.87 ± 0.26 mm), whereas Group 1 (thermoplasticized gutta-percha with MTA Fillapex) had the highest leakage (2.66 ± 0.61 mm) (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: Although none of the sealers completely prevented apical leakage, GuttaFlow 2 with SCO exhibited the most effective sealing ability. The findings suggest that silicone-based sealers may provide enhanced apical sealing in root canal therapy. Further studies with larger sample sizes and clinical validation are warranted.

生物陶瓷与硅基根管封闭器不同封闭技术的体外比较。
目的:本研究的目的是评估和比较不同的根管封闭技术在体外环境下使用生物陶瓷和硅基根管密封剂的根尖密封能力。材料和方法:将25颗拔出的下颌前磨牙标准化至15mm根长,使用ProTaper通用镍钛旋转锉进行矫治。根据所使用的封闭技术和密封剂随机分为5组(n = 5)。第1组和第2组分别采用热塑性胶-过胶与矿物三氧化骨料(MTA) Fillapex和Ceraseal进行封闭。第3组和第4组分别使用含MTA Fillapex和Ceraseal的生物陶瓷杜仲胶。第5组采用GuttaFlow 2的单锥封闭(SCO)。用亚甲基蓝染料渗透法评估根尖微渗漏,并用ImageJ软件在×20放大的立体显微镜下分析测量结果。统计学分析采用单因素方差分析(P < 0.05)。结果:各组均有不同程度的根尖渗漏。5组(含SCO的GuttaFlow 2)平均渗漏最小(0.87±0.26 mm),而1组(含MTA Fillapex的热塑性杜仲胶)平均渗漏最大(2.66±0.61 mm) (P < 0.05)。结论:虽然没有一种封口剂能完全防止根尖渗漏,但GuttaFlow 2与SCO的封口剂表现出最有效的封口剂。研究结果表明,硅基密封剂可以提高根管治疗的根尖密封。进一步的研究需要更大的样本量和临床验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信