{"title":"不同根管封闭剂理化性质的比较研究。","authors":"Kiran Singbal, Philip Pradeep, Ashvin Kaur Mangat","doi":"10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_866_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>New endodontic sealers are frequently introduced; hence, understanding the properties of each sealer and choosing the most appropriate one is essential for clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to assess the physicochemical properties of a new zinc oxide eugenol-based sealer (EssenSeal<sup>®</sup>) compared with three other sealers: a calcium hydroxide-based sealer (Hydrosealer), a bioceramic silicone-based sealer (Roeko GuttaFlow), and an epoxy resin-based sealer (AH Plus).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The evaluation included pH, flow, radiopacity, and solubility according to the ISO 6876/2012 standard. pH levels were measured at various time intervals in deionized water (1, 3, 24, 72, 168, 336, and 504 h). Radiopacity was assessed radiographically in millimeters of aluminum, while solubility was determined after 7 days of immersion in deionized water and quantified by mass loss (%). Data analysis involved ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis, and pairwise comparison tests, with statistical significance set at <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EssenSeal<sup>®</sup> exhibited the highest flow and solubility (<i>P</i> < 0.001), while AH Plus showed the highest radiopacity and the lowest pH and solubility (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Except for AH Plus, all sealers demonstrated alkalinization and radiopacity in compliance with ISO 6876 standards.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EssenSeal<sup>®</sup> showed promising physicochemical properties, but did not fully comply with ISO 6876/2012 standards.</p>","PeriodicalId":516842,"journal":{"name":"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics","volume":"28 4","pages":"325-330"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12037120/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of physicochemical properties of various root canal sealers: An <i>in vitro</i> study.\",\"authors\":\"Kiran Singbal, Philip Pradeep, Ashvin Kaur Mangat\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_866_24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>New endodontic sealers are frequently introduced; hence, understanding the properties of each sealer and choosing the most appropriate one is essential for clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aimed to assess the physicochemical properties of a new zinc oxide eugenol-based sealer (EssenSeal<sup>®</sup>) compared with three other sealers: a calcium hydroxide-based sealer (Hydrosealer), a bioceramic silicone-based sealer (Roeko GuttaFlow), and an epoxy resin-based sealer (AH Plus).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The evaluation included pH, flow, radiopacity, and solubility according to the ISO 6876/2012 standard. pH levels were measured at various time intervals in deionized water (1, 3, 24, 72, 168, 336, and 504 h). Radiopacity was assessed radiographically in millimeters of aluminum, while solubility was determined after 7 days of immersion in deionized water and quantified by mass loss (%). Data analysis involved ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis, and pairwise comparison tests, with statistical significance set at <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EssenSeal<sup>®</sup> exhibited the highest flow and solubility (<i>P</i> < 0.001), while AH Plus showed the highest radiopacity and the lowest pH and solubility (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Except for AH Plus, all sealers demonstrated alkalinization and radiopacity in compliance with ISO 6876 standards.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EssenSeal<sup>®</sup> showed promising physicochemical properties, but did not fully comply with ISO 6876/2012 standards.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":516842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics\",\"volume\":\"28 4\",\"pages\":\"325-330\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12037120/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_866_24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_866_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative evaluation of physicochemical properties of various root canal sealers: An in vitro study.
Background: New endodontic sealers are frequently introduced; hence, understanding the properties of each sealer and choosing the most appropriate one is essential for clinical decision-making.
Aim: This study aimed to assess the physicochemical properties of a new zinc oxide eugenol-based sealer (EssenSeal®) compared with three other sealers: a calcium hydroxide-based sealer (Hydrosealer), a bioceramic silicone-based sealer (Roeko GuttaFlow), and an epoxy resin-based sealer (AH Plus).
Materials and methods: The evaluation included pH, flow, radiopacity, and solubility according to the ISO 6876/2012 standard. pH levels were measured at various time intervals in deionized water (1, 3, 24, 72, 168, 336, and 504 h). Radiopacity was assessed radiographically in millimeters of aluminum, while solubility was determined after 7 days of immersion in deionized water and quantified by mass loss (%). Data analysis involved ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis, and pairwise comparison tests, with statistical significance set at P < 0.05.
Results: EssenSeal® exhibited the highest flow and solubility (P < 0.001), while AH Plus showed the highest radiopacity and the lowest pH and solubility (P < 0.001). Except for AH Plus, all sealers demonstrated alkalinization and radiopacity in compliance with ISO 6876 standards.
Conclusion: EssenSeal® showed promising physicochemical properties, but did not fully comply with ISO 6876/2012 standards.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
