Microleakage evaluation around retrograde filling materials prepared using conventional and ultrasonic techniques.

INTRODUCTION

The importance of the retrograde cavity preparation and the material used to restore is of utmost importance to achieve successful surgical endodontics.

AIM

The aim of the present study is to evaluate the apical micro-leakage of root end cavities filled with Mineral trioxide aggregate, Biodentine and light cure GIC using two different cavity preparation techniques that is conventional bur preparation and ultrasonic tip preparation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty extracted single rooted human teeth (except mandibular incisors) with one canal, fully developed apices and without any major carious lesion are collected for the study. The teeth were sectioned at CEJ to standardize the length. Roots are instrumented upto master apical file 40 K size and obturated with gutta percha and AH plus sealer in lateral condensation technique. The teeth were then resected apically at 90° angle axis to the long axis of the root removing 3 mm of the apex. The teeth were divided in to four groups of 20 each- • Group I- samples restored with MTA. • Group II- samples restored with Biodentine. • Group III- (Positive control group)- samples restored with Light activated GIC. • Group IV - (negative control group)- no filling material. Each group is divided into two subgroups (a, b) of ten teeth each 1. Retropreparation done with ultrasonic retrotip. 2. Retropreparation done with conventional bur. The teeth were then immersed in 0.5% Rhodamine B dye for 48 h. The teeth were split longitudinally and the interface between the restored material and the canal wall is observed under Confocal laser scanning microscope. Depth of dye penetration was examined under stereomicroscope.

RESULTS

The statistical analysis was performed by One way ANOVA, t test. Pair wise comparision was done by Newman - Keuls multiple post hoc test. The mean values of Dye penetration for Group Ia (321.23), Group Ib (490.11), Group IIa (1065.14), Group IIb (1170.96), Group IIIa (1888.90), Group IIIb (2025.35). The samples prepared with ultrasonic retrotip showed less microleakage but it is statistically not significant.

CONCLUSION

MTA showed significantly less microleakage when compared to Biodentine and light cure GIC and there is no statistical difference between the ultrasonic retrotip preparation and conventional bur preparation.