• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.98-106
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether intracanal irrigation method could affect the adhesion between intracanal dentin and root canal filling materials (Gutta-percha/AH 26 sealer and Resilon/Epiphany sealer). Thirty extracted human incisor teeth were prepared. Canals were irrigated with three different irrigation methods as a final rinse and obturated with two different canal filling materials (G groups: Gutta-percha/AH 26 sealer, R groups: Resilon/Epiphany sealer) respectively. Group G1, R1-irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl Group G2, R2-irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl, sterile saline Group G3, R3-irrigated with 5.25% NaOCl, 17% EDTA, sterile saline Thirty obturated roots were horizontally sliced and push-out bond strength test was performed in the universal testing machine. After test, the failure patterns of the specimens were observed using Image-analyzing microscope. The results were as follows. 1. Gutta-percha/AH 26 sealer groups had significantly higher push-out bond strength compared with the Resilon/Epiphany sealer groups (p < 0.05). 2. Push-out bond strength was higher when using 17% EDTA followed by sterile saline than using NaOCl as a final irrigation solution in the Resilon/Epiphany sealer groups (p < 0.05). 3. In the failure pattern analysis, there was no cohesive failure in Group G1, G2, and R1. Gutta-percha/AH 26 sealer groups appeared to exhibit predominantly adhesive and mixed failure patterns, whereas Resilon/Epiphany sealer groups exhibited mixed failures with the cohesive failure occurred within the Resilon substrate.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.39 no.4
• /
• pp.282-287
• /
• 2014

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to investigate the bond strength of RelyX Unicem (3M) to root canal dentin when used as an endodontic sealer. Materials and Methods: Samples of 24 single-rooted teeth were prepared with Gates Glidden drills and K3 files. After that, the roots were randomly assigned to three experimental groups (n = 8) according to the filling material, (1) AH Plus (Dentsply De Trey GmbH)/Gutta-Percha cone; (2) Epiphany SE (Pentron)/Resilon cone; (3) RelyX Unicem/Gutta-Percha cone. All roots were filled using a single cone technique associated to vertical condensation. After the filling procedures, each tooth was prepared for a push-out bond strenght test by cutting 1 mm-thick root slices. Loading was performed on a universal testing machine at a speed of 0.5 mm/min. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey test for multiple comparisons were used to compare the results among the experimental groups. Results: Epiphany SE/Resilon showed significantly lower push-out bond strength than both AH Plus/Gutta-Percha and RelyX Unicem/Gutta-Percha (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in bond strength between AH Plus/Gutta-Percha and RelyX Unicem/Gutta-Percha (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Under the present in vitro conditions, bond strength to root dentin promoted by RelyX Unicem was similar to AH Plus. Epiphany SE/Resilon resulted in lower bond strength values when compared to both materials.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.323-329
• /
• 2006

The aim of this study was to evaluate the retrievability of Resilon as a root canal filling material Twenty-seven human single-rooted extracted teeth were instrumented utilizing a crown down technique with Gates-Glidden burs and ProFile system. In group1 (n = 12) canals were obturated with gutta percha and AH-26 plus sealer using a continuous wave technique and backfilled. In group 2 (n = 15) Resilon was used as a filling material. Then teeth were sealed and kept in $37^{\circ}C$ and 100% humidity for 7 days. For retreatment, the samples were re-accessed and filling material was removed using Gates-Glidden burs and ProFiles. Teeth were sectioned longitudinally to compare the general cleanliness and amount of debris $({\times}\;75)$ using SEM. Chi-square test was used $({\alpha}\;=\;0.05)$ to analyze the data. The total time required for removal of filling materials was expressed as mean ${\pm}SD$ (min) and analyzed by the Student t-test $({\alpha}\;=\;0.05)$, Required time for retreatment was $3.25\;{\pm}\;0.32$ minutes for gutta percha/ AH 26 plus sealer and $3.05\;{\pm}\;0.34$ minutes for Resilon. There was no statistically significant difference between the two experimental groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in the cleanliness of the root canal wall. This study showed that Resilon was effectively removed by Gates-Glidden burs and ProFiles.