Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Micro-computed tomographic evaluation of single-cone obturation with three sealers

  • Sahar Zare (University of New England College of Dental Medicine) ;
  • Ivy Shen (University of New England College of Dental Medicine) ;
  • Qiang Zhu (Division of Endodontology, University of Connecticut School of Dental Medicine) ;
  • Chul Ahn (Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center) ;
  • Carolyn Primus (Augusta University Dental College of Georgia) ;
  • Takashi Komabayashi (University of New England College of Dental Medicine)
  • Received : 2020.09.19
  • Accepted : 2020.12.09
  • Published : 2021.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: This study used micro-computed tomography (µCT) to compare voids and interfaces in single-cone obturation among AH Plus, EndoSequence BC, and prototype surface pre-reacted glass ionomer (S-PRG) sealers and to determine the percentage of sealer contact at the dentin and gutta-percha (GP) interfaces. Materials and Methods: Fifteen single-rooted human teeth were shaped using ProTaper NEXT size X5 rotary files using 2.5% NaOCl irrigation. Roots were obturated with a single-cone ProTaper NEXT GP point X5 with AH Plus, EndoSequence BC, or prototype S-PRG sealer (n = 5/group). Results: The volumes of GP, sealer, and voids were measured in the region of 0-2, 2-4, 4-6, and 6-8 mm from the apex, using image analysis of sagittal µCT scans. GP volume percentages were: AH Plus (75.5%), EndoSequence BC (87.3%), and prototype S-PRG (94.4%). Sealer volume percentages were less: AH Plus (14.3%), EndoSequence BC (6.8%), and prototype S-PRG (4.6%). Void percentages were AH Plus (10.1%), EndoSequence BC (5.9%), and prototype S-PRG (1.0%). Dentin-sealer contact ratios of AH Plus, EndoSequence BC, and prototype S-PRG groups were 82.4% ± 6.8%, 71.6% ± 25.3%, and 70.2% ± 9.4%, respectively. GP-sealer contact ratios of AH Plus, EndoSequence BC, and prototype S-PRG groups were 65.6% ± 29.1%, 80.7% ± 25.8%, and 87.0% ± 8.6%, respectively. Conclusions: Prototype S-PRG sealer created a low-void obturation, similar to EndoSequence BC sealer with similar dentin-sealer contact (> 70%) and GP-sealer contact (> 80%). Prototype S-PRG sealer presented comparable filling quality to EndoSequence BC sealer.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This publication was supported by the University of New England Office of Research & Scholarship and by the Shofu Dental Corporation (Kyoto, Japan). The authors thank Mr. Ali Bahadur for micro CT and software support. The authors also thank Dr. David Colmenar, Dr. Tenzin Tamula, Mr. J. Rafael Malang, and Mr. Brody Valley for administrative support. The authors also thank Ms. Elizabeth J. Dyer for reference support and Ms. Lori Rand for writing consultation and editing.

References

  1. Sjogren U, Hagglund B, Sundqvist G, Wing K. Factors affecting the long-term results of endodontic treatment. J Endod 1990;16:498-504. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(07)80180-4
  2. Ng YL, Mann V, Rahbaran S, Lewsey J, Gulabivala K. Outcome of primary root canal treatment: systematic review of the literature -- Part 2. Influence of clinical factors. Int Endod J 2008;41:6-31.
  3. Komabayashi T, Colmenar D, Cvach N, Bhat A, Primus C, Imai Y. Comprehensive review of current endodontic sealers. Dent Mater J 2020;39:703-720. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2019-288
  4. Lacey S, Pitt Ford TR, Watson TF, Sherriff M. A study of the rheological properties of endodontic sealers. Int Endod J 2005;38:499-504. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.00953.x
  5. Schafer E, Schrenker C, Zupanc J, Burklein S. Percentage of gutta-percha filled areas in canals obturated with cross-linked gutta-percha core-carrier systems, single-cone and lateral compaction technique. J Endod 2016;42:294-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.10.018
  6. Ray HA, Trope M. Periapical status of endodontically treated teeth in relation to the technical quality of the root filling and the coronal restoration. Int Endod J 1995;28:12-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1995.tb00150.x
  7. Kataoka H, Yoshioka T, Suda H, Imai Y. Dentin bonding and sealing ability of a new root canal resin sealer. J Endod 2000;26:230-235. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004770-200004000-00009
  8. Zhou HM, Shen Y, Zheng W, Li L, Zheng YF, Haapasalo M. Physical properties of 5 root canal sealers. J Endod 2013;39:1281-1286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.06.012
  9. Chybowski EA, Glickman GN, Patel Y, Fleury A, Solomon E, He J. Clinical outcome of non-surgical root canal treatment using a single-cone technique with endosequence bioceramic sealer: a retrospective analysis. J Endod 2018;44:941-945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.02.019
  10. Miki S, Kitagawa H, Kitagawa R, Kiba W, Hayashi M, Imazato S. Antibacterial activity of resin composites containing surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) filler. Dent Mater 2016;32:1095-1102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.06.018
  11. Yassen GH, Huang R, Al-Zain A, Yoshida T, Gregory RL, Platt JA. Evaluation of selected properties of a new root repair cement containing surface pre-reacted glass ionomer fillers. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20:2139-2148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1715-5
  12. Miyaji H, Mayumi K, Miyata S, Nishida E, Shitomi K, Hamamoto A, Tanaka S, Akasaka T. Comparative biological assessments of endodontic root canal sealer containing surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer (S-PRG) filler or silica filler. Dent Mater J 2020;39:287-294. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2019-029
  13. Kusaka Y. Influence of root canal sealer containing S-PRG filler on osteogenesis in tibia of rats. J Meikai Dent Med 2018;47:139-147.
  14. Keles A, Alcin H, Kamalak A, Versiani MA. Micro-CT evaluation of root filling quality in oval-shaped canals. Int Endod J 2014;47:1177-1184. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12269
  15. Celikten B, Uzuntas CF, Orhan AI, Orhan K, Tufenkci P, Kursun S, Demiralp KO. Evaluation of root canal sealer filling quality using a single-cone technique in oval shaped canals: an in vitro micro-CT study. Scanning 2016;38:133-140. https://doi.org/10.1002/sca.21249
  16. Jain S, Adhikari HD. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of marginal adaptation of AH-plus, GuttaFlow, and RealSeal at apical one-third of root canals - part I: dentin-sealer interface. J Conserv Dent 2018;21:85-89.
  17. Adhikari HD, Jain S. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of marginal adaptation of AH-Plus, GuttaFlow, and RealSeal at apical one-third of root canals - part II: core-sealer interface. J Conserv Dent 2018;21:90-94.
  18. Mohammadian F, Farahanimastary F, Dibaji F, Kharazifard MJ. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of the sealer-dentine interface of three sealers. Iran Endod J 2017;12:38-42.
  19. Eltair M, Pitchika V, Hickel R, Kuhnisch J, Diegritz C. Evaluation of the interface between gutta-percha and two types of sealers using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Clin Oral Investig 2018;22:1631-1639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2216-x
  20. Polineni S, Bolla N, Mandava P, Vemuri S, Mallela M, Gandham VM. Marginal adaptation of newer root canal sealers to dentin: a SEM study. J Conserv Dent 2016;19:360-363. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.186453
  21. Ray H, Seltzer S. A new glass ionomer root canal sealer. J Endod 1991;17:598-603. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81832-7
  22. McMichen FR, Pearson G, Rahbaran S, Gulabivala K. A comparative study of selected physical properties of five root-canal sealers. Int Endod J 2003;36:629-635. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00701.x
  23. Lee JK, Kwak SW, Ha JH, Lee W, Kim HC. Physicochemical properties of epoxy resin-based and bioceramic-based root canal sealers. Bioinorg Chem Appl 2017;2017:2582849.
  24. Carrotte P. Endodontics: Part 8. Filling the root canal system. Br Dent J 2004;197:667-672. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811855
  25. Naseri M, Kangarlou A, Khavid A, Goodini M. Evaluation of the quality of four root canal obturation techniques using micro-computed tomography. Iran Endod J 2013;8:89-93.
  26. Wolf M, Kupper K, Reimann S, Bourauel C, Frentzen M. 3D analyses of interface voids in root canals filled with different sealer materials in combination with warm gutta-percha technique. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18:155-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-0970-y
  27. Schafer E, Koster M, Burklein S. Percentage of gutta-percha-filled areas in canals instrumented with nickel-titanium systems and obturated with matching single cones. J Endod 2013;39:924-928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.04.001
  28. Moeller L, Wenzel A, Wegge-Larsen AM, Ding M, Kirkevang LL. Quality of root fillings performed with two root filling techniques. An in vitro study using micro-CT. Acta Odontol Scand 2013;71:689-696. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2012.715192
  29. Al-Haddad A, Abu Kasim NH, Che Ab Aziz ZA. Interfacial adaptation and thickness of bioceramic-based root canal sealers. Dent Mater J 2015;34:516-521. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2015-049
  30. De Gee AJ, Wu MK, Wesselink PR. Sealing properties of Ketac-Endo glass ionomer cement and AH26 root canal sealers. Int Endod J 1994;27:239-244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1994.tb00262.x