Pradipkumar R. Damor, R. Tewari, S. Mishra, S. Andrabi
{"title":"使用扫描电子显微镜评估三氧化二铝矿物聚合体 Fillapex、EndoSequence BC 和 AH Plus 封闭剂的牙本质壁适应能力:体外研究","authors":"Pradipkumar R. Damor, R. Tewari, S. Mishra, S. Andrabi","doi":"10.4103/endo.endo_169_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n The present study was conducted to evaluate the dentinal wall adaptation ability of different root canal sealers (mineral trioxide aggregate Fillapex [MTA], EndoSequence BC [ESBC] Sealer, and AH Plus) using a scanning electron microscope (SEM).\n \n \n \n Forty-five extracted single-rooted human maxillary incisor teeth were selected and divided into three equal groups (n = 15). Working length was established using a #15 K-type file. Canals were prepared with rotary Ni–Ti system to size 30/0.06 or 40/0.06 file using endomotor at 250 rpm, irrigated with 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, 3% NaOCl, and normal saline solution, and dried with paper points. Prepared canals were obturated with gutta-percha cones using the single-cone technique and appropriate sealers. Specimens were stored in saline solution at 37°C for 48 h and evaluated using a SEM.\n \n \n \n Unpaired t-test, one-way analysis of variance, and post-hoc tests verified the differences between groups and were considered significant at alpha = 5%.\n \n \n \n None of the specimens showed a gap-free interface. Gaps compared between MTAF and ESBC did not show any statistically significant differences (coronal [P = 0.9757], middle [P = 0.5464], and apical [P = 0.2136] thirds). However, gaps found at the interface of sealer and dentinal wall in root canals filled with AH Plus showed extremely statistically significant differences when compared with MTAF and ESBC (P < 0.0001).\n \n \n \n Specimens obturated with MTAF and ESBC Sealer showed smaller gaps on SEM analysis than specimens filled with AH Plus.\n","PeriodicalId":11607,"journal":{"name":"Endodontology","volume":"116 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the dentinal wall adaptation ability of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate Fillapex, EndoSequence BC, and AH Plus sealers using Scanning Electron Microscope: An in vitro study\",\"authors\":\"Pradipkumar R. Damor, R. Tewari, S. Mishra, S. Andrabi\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/endo.endo_169_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n The present study was conducted to evaluate the dentinal wall adaptation ability of different root canal sealers (mineral trioxide aggregate Fillapex [MTA], EndoSequence BC [ESBC] Sealer, and AH Plus) using a scanning electron microscope (SEM).\\n \\n \\n \\n Forty-five extracted single-rooted human maxillary incisor teeth were selected and divided into three equal groups (n = 15). Working length was established using a #15 K-type file. Canals were prepared with rotary Ni–Ti system to size 30/0.06 or 40/0.06 file using endomotor at 250 rpm, irrigated with 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, 3% NaOCl, and normal saline solution, and dried with paper points. Prepared canals were obturated with gutta-percha cones using the single-cone technique and appropriate sealers. Specimens were stored in saline solution at 37°C for 48 h and evaluated using a SEM.\\n \\n \\n \\n Unpaired t-test, one-way analysis of variance, and post-hoc tests verified the differences between groups and were considered significant at alpha = 5%.\\n \\n \\n \\n None of the specimens showed a gap-free interface. Gaps compared between MTAF and ESBC did not show any statistically significant differences (coronal [P = 0.9757], middle [P = 0.5464], and apical [P = 0.2136] thirds). However, gaps found at the interface of sealer and dentinal wall in root canals filled with AH Plus showed extremely statistically significant differences when compared with MTAF and ESBC (P < 0.0001).\\n \\n \\n \\n Specimens obturated with MTAF and ESBC Sealer showed smaller gaps on SEM analysis than specimens filled with AH Plus.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":11607,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endodontology\",\"volume\":\"116 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endodontology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/endo.endo_169_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endodontology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/endo.endo_169_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of the dentinal wall adaptation ability of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate Fillapex, EndoSequence BC, and AH Plus sealers using Scanning Electron Microscope: An in vitro study
The present study was conducted to evaluate the dentinal wall adaptation ability of different root canal sealers (mineral trioxide aggregate Fillapex [MTA], EndoSequence BC [ESBC] Sealer, and AH Plus) using a scanning electron microscope (SEM).
Forty-five extracted single-rooted human maxillary incisor teeth were selected and divided into three equal groups (n = 15). Working length was established using a #15 K-type file. Canals were prepared with rotary Ni–Ti system to size 30/0.06 or 40/0.06 file using endomotor at 250 rpm, irrigated with 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, 3% NaOCl, and normal saline solution, and dried with paper points. Prepared canals were obturated with gutta-percha cones using the single-cone technique and appropriate sealers. Specimens were stored in saline solution at 37°C for 48 h and evaluated using a SEM.
Unpaired t-test, one-way analysis of variance, and post-hoc tests verified the differences between groups and were considered significant at alpha = 5%.
None of the specimens showed a gap-free interface. Gaps compared between MTAF and ESBC did not show any statistically significant differences (coronal [P = 0.9757], middle [P = 0.5464], and apical [P = 0.2136] thirds). However, gaps found at the interface of sealer and dentinal wall in root canals filled with AH Plus showed extremely statistically significant differences when compared with MTAF and ESBC (P < 0.0001).
Specimens obturated with MTAF and ESBC Sealer showed smaller gaps on SEM analysis than specimens filled with AH Plus.