Adhesion capacity of bioceramic and resin-based root canal sealer to root dentin: an integrative review

Revista Brasileira de Odontologia Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.18363/rbo.v77.2020.e1758

Carolyne de Pinho Quintão, S. Costa, M. Lacerda, C. Girelli, C. D. de Lima

{"title":"Adhesion capacity of bioceramic and resin-based root canal sealer to root dentin: an integrative review","authors":"Carolyne de Pinho Quintão, S. Costa, M. Lacerda, C. Girelli, C. D. de Lima","doi":"10.18363/rbo.v77.2020.e1758","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: to compare the adhesion capacity of the bioceramic EndoSequence BC sealer and the AH Plus sealer through an integrative review. Material and Methods: the Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Virtual Health Library (VHL) online databases were used for the literature review. Eligibility criteria comprised articles available in full on the researched databases, in English, and content addressing Endosequence BC sealer adhesion compared to AH Plus sealer. Results: a total of 45 articles were found. After duplicate removal, 22 articles were selected. After reading the abstracts, full texts and applying the inclusion criteria, eight articles in total were included in the present study. Concerning the adhesion capacity of the tested cements, the AH Plus was reported as presenting better adhesion than the BC sealer in three articles, and less adhesion in two articles. Similar adherence strength was observed between groups in three studies. Conclusions: based on the included studies, the AH Plus displays greater bond strength when compared to the BC Sealer.","PeriodicalId":53157,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Odontologia","volume":"238 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Odontologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18363/rbo.v77.2020.e1758","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: to compare the adhesion capacity of the bioceramic EndoSequence BC sealer and the AH Plus sealer through an integrative review. Material and Methods: the Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Virtual Health Library (VHL) online databases were used for the literature review. Eligibility criteria comprised articles available in full on the researched databases, in English, and content addressing Endosequence BC sealer adhesion compared to AH Plus sealer. Results: a total of 45 articles were found. After duplicate removal, 22 articles were selected. After reading the abstracts, full texts and applying the inclusion criteria, eight articles in total were included in the present study. Concerning the adhesion capacity of the tested cements, the AH Plus was reported as presenting better adhesion than the BC sealer in three articles, and less adhesion in two articles. Similar adherence strength was observed between groups in three studies. Conclusions: based on the included studies, the AH Plus displays greater bond strength when compared to the BC Sealer.

查看原文本刊更多论文

生物陶瓷和树脂基根管密封剂对根本质的粘附能力综述

目的:通过综合评价比较生物陶瓷EndoSequence BC缝合器和AH Plus缝合器的粘附能力。材料与方法:采用Medline/PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Virtual Health Library (VHL)在线数据库进行文献综述。资格标准包括可在研究数据库上获得的全部文章，英文，以及与AH Plus封口剂相比解决Endosequence BC封口剂粘附性的内容。结果:共发现文献45篇。去除重复后，选取22篇。在阅读摘要、全文并应用纳入标准后，本研究共纳入8篇文章。关于所测试水泥的粘附能力，有三篇文章报道了AH Plus比BC密封剂具有更好的粘附性，有两篇文章报道了较差的粘附性。在三项研究中，观察到各组之间的粘附强度相似。结论:根据纳入的研究，与BC Sealer相比，AH Plus显示出更大的粘合强度。

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

Revista Brasileira de Odontologia

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

13 weeks