Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Goethestraße 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Future University, Cairo, Egypt.
Clin Oral Investig. 2018 May;22(4):1631-1639. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2216-x. Epub 2017 Oct 27.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the adaptation of a calcium silicate bioceramic (BC) sealer with either BC or conventional gutta-percha compared with that of AH Plus sealer in different root canal sections.
Seventy-two extracted mandibular premolars were divided randomly into six groups. After standardised chemomechanical preparation, four groups were obturated with the BC sealer and BC gutta-percha or conventional gutta-percha, and the other two groups were obturated with AH Plus sealer and conventional gutta-percha either in lateral compaction or in a single cone technique. Each root was sectioned into three sections. An impression was made from each section, and replicas were then made for scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis. Areas and interfacial gaps were identified using image analysis software. In addition to descriptive and explorative data analyses, linear regression analysis was performed.
All specimens had measurable interfacial gaps. Significantly fewer gaps were found between conventional gutta-percha and sealer compared to those observed when using the BC gutta-percha (p < 0.001). However, minor interfacial gaps between sealer and dentin were observed with the BC sealer (p = 0.04). The technique of obturation in different root canal sections did not significantly affect the sealer adaptability.
The type of gutta-percha as well as the sealer had a noticeable impact on the adaptability.
Different obturation techniques will result in similar outcomes. However, within the limitations of the study, there seems to be no advantage in using the BC gutta-percha.
本研究旨在评估一种硅酸钙生物陶瓷(BC)密封剂与 BC 或常规牙胶相比,在不同根管段中的适应性。
72 颗下颌前磨牙随机分为 6 组。在进行标准化的化学机械预备后,4 组分别用 BC 密封剂和 BC 牙胶或常规牙胶进行填充,另外 2 组分别用 AH Plus 密封剂和常规牙胶在侧向压实或单尖技术中进行填充。每个根都分为 3 个部分。从每个部分制取印模,然后制作扫描电镜(SEM)分析的复制品。使用图像分析软件识别面积和界面间隙。除了描述性和探索性数据分析外,还进行了线性回归分析。
所有标本均有可测量的界面间隙。与使用 BC 牙胶相比,常规牙胶和密封剂之间的间隙明显较少(p<0.001)。然而,在使用 BC 密封剂时,观察到与牙本质之间存在较小的界面间隙(p=0.04)。不同根管段的填充技术并未显著影响密封剂的适应性。
牙胶的类型以及密封剂对适应性有显著影响。
不同的填充技术将产生相似的结果。然而,在本研究的限制范围内,使用 BC 牙胶似乎没有优势。