Nagdi Alaa H, Mokhless Nayera A, Aboelseoud Mahmoud R
Division of Endodontics, Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Champollion St, P. O. Box: 21527, Azarita, Alexandria, Egypt.
BMC Oral Health. 2025 Jun 3;25(1):887. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06263-0.
The separation of root canal instruments can significantly impact the quality of canal obturation and the long-term success of endodontic treatment. Combining the benefits of nanoparticles and ultrasonic activation aim to enhance tubular sealer penetration and achieve proper sealing to improve outcome in such complex cases.
This study aimed to evaluate tubular penetration of two nanoparticles modified root canal sealers compared to conventional sealers using ultrasonic activation over an apically separated file analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
Forty extracted single canaled mandibular premolar teeth were decoronated and prepared using M-Pro (IMD, Shanghai, China) nickel titanium rotary files which were intentionally separated at apical third. Teeth were randomly divided into four equal groups based on the type of sealer used. Group I: Adseal (Rs) (Meta Biomed, Cheongju, Korea) resin-based sealer, group II: Adseal resin-based sealer modified with silver nanoparticles (Rs/Ag), group III: Ceraseal (BC) (Meta Biomed, Cheongju, Korea) bioceramic sealer and group IV: Ceraseal bioceramic sealer modified with bioactive glass nanoparticles (BC/BG). The tested sealers were applied in all root specimens using lentulo-spiral size #25 (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) except the BC group where the sealer was injected into the root using plastic delivery tips provided by the manufacturer. All sealers were ultrasonically activated then obturated using cold lateral compaction technique. All samples were sectioned longitudinally in a buccolingual direction and analyzed for tubular sealer penetration using SEM at the area of separated file.
The maximum mean tubular sealer penetration depth, measured in microns, was evident in the BC sealer group (97.00 ± 14.78) followed by the Rs/Ag group (94.12 ± 15.89) with no significant difference between them (p = 1.00). However, a significant difference (p < 0.05) was found when comparing these groups to the Rs group (73.00 ± 7.53) and the BC/BG group (69.78 ± 15.19). No significant difference (p = 1.00) was observed between the Rs and BC/BG groups.
Under the parameters of this in vitro study, conventional bioceramic sealer and resin-based sealer modified with silver nanoparticles exhibit more tubular penetration depth over apically separated file compared to conventional resin-based sealer and bioceramic sealer modified with bioactive glass nanoparticles.
根管器械分离会显著影响根管充填质量和牙髓治疗的长期成功率。结合纳米颗粒和超声激活的优点旨在增强根管封闭剂的渗透,并实现适当的密封,以改善此类复杂病例的治疗效果。
本研究旨在通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)分析,评估两种纳米颗粒改性根管封闭剂与传统封闭剂在超声激活下对根尖分离锉的根管渗透情况。
40颗拔除的单根管下颌前磨牙去冠后,使用M-Pro(中国上海IMD)镍钛旋转锉进行预备,并在根尖三分之一处故意分离。根据所用封闭剂的类型,将牙齿随机分为四组。第一组:Adseal(Rs)(韩国清州Meta Biomed公司)树脂基封闭剂;第二组:用银纳米颗粒改性的Adseal树脂基封闭剂(Rs/Ag);第三组:Ceraseal(BC)(韩国清州Meta Biomed公司)生物陶瓷封闭剂;第四组:用生物活性玻璃纳米颗粒改性的Ceraseal生物陶瓷封闭剂(BC/BG)。除BC组使用制造商提供的塑料输送头将封闭剂注入根管外,所有受试封闭剂均使用#25慢锥度螺旋输送器(瑞士Ballaigues登士柏迈徕福公司)应用于所有根管标本。所有封闭剂均经超声激活,然后采用冷侧向加压技术进行充填。所有样本沿颊舌方向纵向切片,并在分离锉区域使用SEM分析根管封闭剂的渗透情况。
以微米为单位测量的最大平均根管封闭剂渗透深度,在BC封闭剂组(97.00±14.78)最明显,其次是Rs/Ag组(94.12±15.89),两组之间无显著差异(p = 1.00)。然而,将这些组与Rs组(73.00±7.53)和BC/BG组(69.78±15.19)进行比较时,发现有显著差异(p < 0.05)。Rs组和BC/BG组之间未观察到显著差异(p = 1.00)。
在本体外研究的参数下,与传统树脂基封闭剂和用生物活性玻璃纳米颗粒改性的生物陶瓷封闭剂相比,传统生物陶瓷封闭剂和用银纳米颗粒改性的树脂基封闭剂在根尖分离锉上表现出更大的根管渗透深度。