» Articles » PMID: 20579133

A Laboratory Evaluation of the Physical and Mechanical Properties of Selected Root Canal Sealers

Overview
Journal Int Endod J
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2010 Jun 29
PMID 20579133
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Aim: To evaluate and compare the porosity, degree of conversion (DC) and hardness of two resin-based sealers; RealSeal and EndoRez, and a silicon-based sealer; GuttaFlow to that of a traditional zinc oxide-based sealer; TubliSeal.

Methodology: For porosity, four samples from each sealer were prepared and scanned using a SkyScan 1072 Micro-CT. Porosity was then calculated using specialized software. For DC, 10 samples from each sealer were prepared and placed onto a Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy spectrometer. Spectra readings were carried out before and after curing of the sealers, and the DC for each sealer was calculated. For hardness, 10 samples from each sealer were prepared and then tested using a Wallace hardness tester. SPSS software was used for statistical analysis of the data using one-way anova and independent t-tests.

Results: TubliSeal had the highest percentage porosity (3.52%), whilst RealSeal had the lowest percentage porosity (0.41%). Statistically significant differences (P = 0.01) in porosity were present between all groups except between RealSeal and EndoRez groups. RealSeal exhibited a significantly higher DC% than EndoRez (P = 0.01), whereas EndoRez had the highest hardness number [28.54 Vickers hardness number (VHN)] whilst TubliSeal showed the lowest (13.57 VHN). Statistically significant differences in hardness were found between all groups (P = 0.01) except between RealSeal and EndoRez groups.

Conclusions: Resin-based sealers had less porosity, greater hardness and a high DC.

Citing Articles

Comparative Assessment of Canal Transportation, Dentin Loss, and Remaining Root Filling Material by Different Retreatment Files An Cross-Sectional Study.

Ali A, Saraf P, Kamatagi L, Khasnis S Contemp Clin Dent. 2021; 12(1):14-20.

PMID: 33967532 PMC: 8092085. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_31_20.


Flowable Urethane Dimethacrylate-Based Filler for Root Canal Obturation in Primary Molars: A Pilot SEM and microCT Assessment.

Drukteinis S, Drukteiniene A, Drukteinis L, Martens L, Rajasekharan S Children (Basel). 2021; 8(2).

PMID: 33498353 PMC: 7909394. DOI: 10.3390/children8020060.


Regenerating a monoblock to obturate root canalsvia a mineralising strategy.

Zhang L, Li Q, Cao Y, Wang Y Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):13356.

PMID: 30190589 PMC: 6127146. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-31643-8.


Analysis of the porosity of endodontic sealers through micro-computed tomography: A systematic review.

Ortiz F, Jimeno E J Conserv Dent. 2018; 21(3):238-242.

PMID: 29899623 PMC: 5977769. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_346_17.


Porosity analysis of MTA and Biodentine cements for use in endodontics by using micro-computed tomography.

Guerrero F, Berastegui E J Clin Exp Dent. 2018; 10(3):e237-e240.

PMID: 29721224 PMC: 5923892. DOI: 10.4317/jced.54688.