-
Comparison of the sealing ability of various bioceramic materials for endodontic surgery
-
Benjamin Rencher, Ana M. Chang, Hanson Fong, James D. Johnson, Avina Paranjpe
-
Restor Dent Endod 2021;46(3):e35. Published online June 8, 2021
-
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2021.46.e35
-
-
Abstract
PDFPubReaderePub
- Objectives
Endosequence Bioceramic Root Repair Material (BC-RRM) is used in endodontic microsurgery. It is available as a paste and a putty. However, no studies to date have examined the sealing ability of these forms alone or in combination as root-end filling materials. Hence, this study aimed to compare the sealing properties of these 2 forms of BC-RRM. Materials and MethodsForty-two extracted upper anterior teeth were divided into 3 experimental groups, a positive and negative control. After the root canal treatment, the root ends were resected, retroprepared and retrofilled with either putty, paste + putty or mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA). The teeth were mounted in tubes so the apical 3 mm was submerged in Brain Heart Infusion (BHI) broth. The coronal portions of the canals were inoculated with Enterococcus faecalis and BHI broth and incubated for 30 days. The broth in the tubes was analyzed for colony forming units to check for leakage of bacteria from the canal. The teeth from the groups were sectioned and analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The Kruskal-Wallis test and analysis of variance were used to analyze the data with a significance level p < 0.05. ResultsThe BC-RRM and MTA groups showed similar sealing ability. The positive control showed leakage in all samples. The SEM imaging showed the presence of bacteria in all experimental groups at the material-tooth interface. ConclusionsNo significant differences were noted in the experimental groups, providing sufficient evidence that any combination could be effectively used during endodontic microsurgery.
-
25
View
-
2
Download
-
8
Web of Science
-
Retreatability of two endodontic sealers, EndoSequence BC Sealer and AH Plus: a micro-computed tomographic comparison
-
Enrique Oltra, Timothy C. Cox, Matthew R. LaCourse, James D. Johnson, Avina Paranjpe
-
Restor Dent Endod 2017;42(1):19-26. Published online December 8, 2016
-
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2017.42.1.19
-
-
Abstract
PDFPubReaderePub
- Objectives
Recently, bioceramic sealers like EndoSequence BC Sealer (BC Sealer) have been introduced and are being used in endodontic practice. However, this sealer has limited research related to its retreatability. Hence, the aim of this study was to evaluate the retreatability of two sealers, BC Sealer as compared with AH Plus using micro-computed tomographic (micro-CT) analysis. Materials and MethodsFifty-six extracted human maxillary incisors were instrumented and randomly divided into 4 groups of 14 teeth: 1A, gutta-percha, AH Plus retreated with chloroform; 1B, gutta-percha, AH Plus retreated without chloroform; 2A, gutta-percha, EndoSequence BC Sealer retreated with chloroform; 2B, gutta-percha, EndoSequence BC Sealer retreated without chloroform. Micro-CT scans were taken before and after obturation and retreatment and analyzed for the volume of residual material. The specimens were longitudinally sectioned and digitized images were taken with the dental operating microscope. Data was analyzed using an ANOVA and a post-hoc Tukey test. Fisher exact tests were performed to analyze the ability to regain patency. ResultsThere was significantly less residual root canal filling material in the AH Plus groups retreated with chloroform as compared to the others. The BC Sealer samples retreated with chloroform had better results than those retreated without chloroform. Furthermore, patency could be re-established in only 14% of teeth in the BC Sealer without chloroform group. ConclusionThe results of this study demonstrate that the BC Sealer group had significantly more residual filling material than the AH Plus group regardless of whether or not both sealers were retreated with chloroform.
|