{"title":"AH +生物陶瓷封口处不同根管干燥方案:一项体外研究。","authors":"Andressa Weber Vargas, Guilherme Pauletto, Rafaela Oliveira Pilecco, Luís Eduardo Cechin, Gabriel Kalil Rocha Pereira, Renata Dornelles Morgental","doi":"10.1111/eos.70028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study compared the bond strength of a bioceramic sealer and an epoxy resin-based sealer to root canals under different drying protocols. Seventy-two single-rooted teeth were allocated to one of three root canal drying protocols: dry; slightly moist; and wet. For each drying protocol two endodontic sealers were used: AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer (AHPB) or AH Plus (AHP) (n = 12 per combination of sealer and drying protocol). Slices of the root thirds were obtained and subjected to an immediate (1 week) and an after aging (10,000 thermal cycles) push-out test. Failure mode analysis and adhesive interface analysis were also carried out. Statistical analyses included two-way ANOVA, Tukey's post hoc test, t-test, and chi-square test. The immediate bond strength of AHP was higher than that of AHPB when the canal was slightly moist or wet. Also, a better marginal adaptation of the AHP to the root canal walls was found than that seen for AHPB. Comparing the different drying protocols within the same endodontic sealer, no differences were observed for AHP or AHPB. After aging, the bond strength decreased for AHP wet and for AHPB dry groups. Failure modes were similar among the groups. The AHP sealer demonstrated superior adhesive performance compared with AHPB, showing better results in dry root canals.</p>","PeriodicalId":11983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Oral Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"e70028"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Different root canal drying protocols for AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer: An in vitro study.\",\"authors\":\"Andressa Weber Vargas, Guilherme Pauletto, Rafaela Oliveira Pilecco, Luís Eduardo Cechin, Gabriel Kalil Rocha Pereira, Renata Dornelles Morgental\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/eos.70028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study compared the bond strength of a bioceramic sealer and an epoxy resin-based sealer to root canals under different drying protocols. Seventy-two single-rooted teeth were allocated to one of three root canal drying protocols: dry; slightly moist; and wet. For each drying protocol two endodontic sealers were used: AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer (AHPB) or AH Plus (AHP) (n = 12 per combination of sealer and drying protocol). Slices of the root thirds were obtained and subjected to an immediate (1 week) and an after aging (10,000 thermal cycles) push-out test. Failure mode analysis and adhesive interface analysis were also carried out. Statistical analyses included two-way ANOVA, Tukey's post hoc test, t-test, and chi-square test. The immediate bond strength of AHP was higher than that of AHPB when the canal was slightly moist or wet. Also, a better marginal adaptation of the AHP to the root canal walls was found than that seen for AHPB. Comparing the different drying protocols within the same endodontic sealer, no differences were observed for AHP or AHPB. After aging, the bond strength decreased for AHP wet and for AHPB dry groups. Failure modes were similar among the groups. The AHP sealer demonstrated superior adhesive performance compared with AHPB, showing better results in dry root canals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Oral Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e70028\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Oral Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.70028\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Oral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.70028","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Different root canal drying protocols for AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer: An in vitro study.
This study compared the bond strength of a bioceramic sealer and an epoxy resin-based sealer to root canals under different drying protocols. Seventy-two single-rooted teeth were allocated to one of three root canal drying protocols: dry; slightly moist; and wet. For each drying protocol two endodontic sealers were used: AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer (AHPB) or AH Plus (AHP) (n = 12 per combination of sealer and drying protocol). Slices of the root thirds were obtained and subjected to an immediate (1 week) and an after aging (10,000 thermal cycles) push-out test. Failure mode analysis and adhesive interface analysis were also carried out. Statistical analyses included two-way ANOVA, Tukey's post hoc test, t-test, and chi-square test. The immediate bond strength of AHP was higher than that of AHPB when the canal was slightly moist or wet. Also, a better marginal adaptation of the AHP to the root canal walls was found than that seen for AHPB. Comparing the different drying protocols within the same endodontic sealer, no differences were observed for AHP or AHPB. After aging, the bond strength decreased for AHP wet and for AHPB dry groups. Failure modes were similar among the groups. The AHP sealer demonstrated superior adhesive performance compared with AHPB, showing better results in dry root canals.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Oral Sciences is an international journal which publishes original research papers within clinical dentistry, on all basic science aspects of structure, chemistry, developmental biology, physiology and pathology of relevant tissues, as well as on microbiology, biomaterials and the behavioural sciences as they relate to dentistry. In general, analytical studies are preferred to descriptive ones. Reviews, Short Communications and Letters to the Editor will also be considered for publication.
The journal is published bimonthly.