Patri Gaurav, Agrawal Pratik, Anushree Nanjegowda, Arora Suraj, Kunjappu Jimly J, Shamsuddin Shaheen V
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, KIIT Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India, Phone: +91 9437962964, e-mail:
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, KIIT Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020 Jan 1;21(1):73-77.
The present study aimed to evaluate the sealing potential and marginal adaptation of different root canal sealers to dentin.
A total of sixty human lower premolars of the permanent dentition that were extracted were used for this study. The visible debris and calculus were removed from the extracted teeth ultrasonically and were kept for 2 hours in 2.5% sodium hypochlorite and stored in normal saline till next use. A low-speed diamond disc was used to section all the teeth samples at the cementoenamel junction. Later, cleaning and shaping of the canals was done. Based on the sealer used, the samples (each group consisting of 20 samples) were divided randomly into three groups: group I-bioceramic sealer, group II-resin-based sealer, group III-MTA-based sealer. All split samples were visualized under scanning electron microscope (SEM) at apical and coronal thirds of root canal, the marginal gap at root dentin and sealer interface were assessed.
The highest marginal adaptation (5.60 ± 0.12) was demonstrated by EndoSequence BC sealer, followed immediately by ProRoot MTA sealer (4.48 ± 0.12) and EndoREZ sealer (2.10 ± 0.54). A statistically significant difference ( = 0.001) was seen between the EndoSequence BC and ProRoot MTA sealer for apical and coronal marginal adaptation. Also, a statistically significant difference ( < 0.05) was found between EndoSequence BC sealer vs EndoREZ sealer at coronal and EndoSequence BC sealer vs EndoREZ sealer and EndoREZ sealer vs ProRoot MTA sealer at apical third.
The present study concluded that significant and better sealing ability and marginal adaptation was demonstrated by EndoSequence BC (bioceramic sealer) when compared to ProRoot MTA sealer (MTA-based sealer) and EndoREZ sealer (resin-based sealer).
Numerous endodontic sealers enter the market with various factors to attain acceptable seal. According to current study bioceramic sealer, is the appropriate sealer that hermetically seals all the margins.
本研究旨在评估不同根管封闭剂对牙本质的封闭潜能和边缘适应性。
本研究共使用60颗拔除的人类恒牙列下颌前磨牙。用超声波去除拔除牙上可见的碎屑和牙结石,在2.5%次氯酸钠中保存2小时,然后保存在生理盐水中备用。用低速金刚石切割片在牙骨质釉质界处将所有牙齿样本切开。随后,进行根管的清理和预备。根据所使用的封闭剂,将样本(每组20个样本)随机分为三组:第一组——生物陶瓷封闭剂组,第二组——树脂基封闭剂组,第三组——MTA基封闭剂组。所有切开的样本在扫描电子显微镜(SEM)下观察根管根尖和冠方三分之一处的情况,评估牙根牙本质与封闭剂界面处的边缘间隙。
EndoSequence BC封闭剂显示出最高的边缘适应性(5.60±0.12),其次是ProRoot MTA封闭剂(4.48±0.12)和EndoREZ封闭剂(2.10±0.54)。EndoSequence BC封闭剂与ProRoot MTA封闭剂在根尖和冠方边缘适应性方面存在统计学显著差异(P = 0.001)。此外,EndoSequence BC封闭剂与EndoREZ封闭剂在冠方以及EndoSequence BC封闭剂与EndoREZ封闭剂、EndoREZ封闭剂与ProRoot MTA封闭剂在根尖三分之一处存在统计学显著差异(P < 0.05)。
本研究得出结论,与ProRoot MTA封闭剂(MTA基封闭剂)和EndoREZ封闭剂(树脂基封闭剂)相比,EndoSequence BC(生物陶瓷封闭剂)显示出显著且更好的封闭能力和边缘适应性。
众多根管封闭剂进入市场,具备各种因素以实现可接受的封闭效果。根据当前研究,生物陶瓷封闭剂是能密封所有边缘的合适封闭剂。