International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 10 ( October, 2024 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Stereomicroscopic Evaluation of the Apical Sealing Ability of Different Root Canal Sealers (Endoseal, Apexit, MTA Fillapex, Ceraseal) Using Diaphanization Technique

Mayurika Patel, Anshul Gangwar, Shivangi Sharma, Sathyajith Naik

Keywords : Apexit, Apical microleakage, Ceraseal, Endoseal, MTA Fillapex

Citation Information : Patel M, Gangwar A, Sharma S, Naik S. Stereomicroscopic Evaluation of the Apical Sealing Ability of Different Root Canal Sealers (Endoseal, Apexit, MTA Fillapex, Ceraseal) Using Diaphanization Technique. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024; 17 (10):1135-1140.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2976

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 27-11-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Introduction: Obturation of the root canal is the most critical step in endodontic treatment, which aims to provide a hermetic seal and prevent regrowth and entry of bacteria into the canal. To achieve this, many sealers are used in endodontics. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of the apical seal obtained by different sealers used in conjunction with the single cone obturation technique using gutta-percha under the stereomicroscope. Materials and methods: Extracted human single-rooted teeth were taken and decoronated at the cementoenamel junction. The access cavity was prepared, and biomechanical preparation was completed. The samples were randomly assigned to four groups consisting of 20 teeth each according to the root canal sealer used and categorized as group I, group II, group III, and group IV. Group I (n = 20)—Endoseal (Prevest DenPro), group II (n = 20)—Apexit Plus (Ivoclar Vivadent), group III (n = 20)—MTA-FillApex (Angelus), and group IV (n = 20)—Ceraseal (Meta Biomed). The teeth were immersed in Indian ink for 7 days and finally transferred to methyl salicylate for diaphanization. The extent of dye penetration was measured using the stereomicroscope. Statistical data analysis was performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey test. Results: Microleakage was seen in all the groups. Apical leakage was maximum for the Endoseal group, followed by MTA Fillapex, Apexit, and Ceraseal. Groups were compared by one-factor ANOVA, and the significance of the mean difference was measured using Tukey's honestly significant difference (HSD) and post hoc test. A statistically significant difference in the depth of dye penetration was observed among the groups (F = 28.66, p < 0.001). Conclusion: It was concluded that there were statistically significant differences among the experimental groups. Ceraseal endodontic root canal sealer provided a significantly better apical seal, followed by Apexit and MTA Fillapex, whereas Endoseal showed the least sealing ability.


PDF Share
  1. Altan H, Göztaş Z, İnci G, et al. Comparative evaluation of apical sealing ability of different root canal sealers. Eur Oral Res 2018;52(3):117–121.
  2. Javidi M, Zarei M, Naghavi N, et al. Zinc oxide nano-particles as sealer in endodontics and its sealing ability. Contemp Clin Dent 2014;5(1):20–24.
  3. Tomer AK, Gupta R, Ramachandran M, et al. Comparison of the apical sealing ability of calcium hydroxide, MTA, and silicone based sealers. Int J Appl Dent Sci 2018;4:3–5.
  4. Trivedi S, Chhabra S, Bansal A, et al. Evaluation of sealing ability of three root canal sealers: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020;21(3):291–295.
  5. Barbero-Navarro I, Irigoyen-Camacho ME, Castano-Seiquer A, et al. In vitro study of the periapical sealing ability of three root canal sealing cement. SRM J Res Dent Sci 2019;10(4):173–177.
  6. Lankar A, Mian RI, Mirza AJ, et al. A comparative evaluation of apical sealability of various root canal sealers used in endodontics. Int Med J 2018;25(1):39–41.
  7. Ronit K, Abrar B, Manoj M, et al. Comparative evaluation of apical sealing ability of MTA based sealers vs resin-based sealers using dye penetration technique: an vitro stereomicroscopic evaluation. Int J Inn Sci Res Tech 2021;(6):719.
  8. Pallavi S, Devadathan A, James B. Comparative evaluation of the apical sealing ability of two root canal sealers using the two different placement techniques. an in vitro study. Cons Dent Endod J 2020;5(1):11–14.
  9. Pereira IR, Carvalho C, Paulo S, et al. Apical sealing ability of two calcium silicate-based sealers using a radioactive isotope method: an in vitro apexification model. Materials 2021;14(21):6456.
  10. Ricardo S, Marissa C, Usman M, et al. Comparison of three bioceramic sealers in terms of dentinal sealing ability in the root canal. Int J Appl Pharm 2020;12(Special Issue 2):4–7.
  11. Dultra F, Barroso JM, Carrasco LD, et al. Evaluation of apical microleakage of teeth sealed with four different root canal sealers. J Appl Oral Sci 2006;14(5):341–345.
  12. Ulusoy Öİ, Nayir Y, Celik K, et al. Apical microleakage of different root canal sealers after use of maleic acid and EDTA as final irrigants. Brazilian Oral Res 2014;28(1):1–6.
  13. Pawar AM, Pawar S, Kfir A, et al. Push-out bond strength of root fillings made with C-Point and BC sealer versus gutta-percha and AH Plus after the instrumentation of oval canals with the Self-Adjusting File versus Wave One. Int Endod J 2016;49(4):374–381.
  14. Shetty V, Hedge P, Chauhan R, et al. Spectro photometric comparative evaluation of apical sealing ability of three different root canal sealers; calcium hydroxide based resin, resin based and ZOE based sealers. J Int Oral Health 2015;7(2):25–27.
  15. Radeva E, Usunov T, Ivanov I, et al. Apical microleakage of four materials after root end resection (in vitro study). Acta Medica Bulgarica 2016;43(2):61–67.
  16. Sultana M, Musani MA, Ahmed IM. An in-vitro comparative study for assessment of apical sealing ability of Epiphany/AH Plus sealer with Resilon/gutta-percha root canal filling materials. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2016;6(4):321–326.
  17. Singh R, Pushpa S, Arunagiri D, et al. Effect of irrigating solutions on the apical sealing ability of MTA Fillapex and Adseal root canal sealers. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospect 2016;10(4):251–256.
  18. Asawaworarit W, Yachor P, Kijsamanmith K, et al. Comparison of the apical sealing ability of calcium silicate-based sealer and resin-based sealer using the fluid-filtration technique. Med Princ Pract 2016;25(6):561–565.
  19. Poggio C, Arciola CR, Dagna A, et al. Solubility of root canal sealers: a comparative study. Int J Artif Organs 2010;33(9):676–681.
  20. Yamada RS, Armas A, Goldman M, et al. A scanning electron microscopic comparison of a high volume final flush with several irrigating solutions: part 3. J Endod 1983;9(4):137–142.
  21. Cengiz T, Aktener BO, Piskin B. Effect of dentinal tubule orientation on the removal of smear layer by root canal irrigants. A scanning electron microscopic study. Int Endod J 1990;23(3):163–171.
  22. White RR, Goldman M, Lin PS. The influence of the smeared layer upon dentinal tubule penetration by plastic filling materials. J Endod 1984;10(12):558–562.
  23. Goldberg F, Artaza LP, De Silvio A. Apical sealing ability of a new glass ionomer root canal sealer. J Endod 1995;21(10):498–500.
  24. Ozkocak I, Sonat B. Evaluation of effects on the adhesion of various root canal sealers after Er:YAG laser and irrigants are used on the dentin surface. J Endod 2015;41(8):1331–1336.
  25. Neelakantan P, Subbarao C, Subbarao CV, et al. The impact of root dentine conditioning on sealing ability and push-out bond strength of an epoxy resin root canal sealer. Int Endod J 2011;44(6):491–498.
  26. Al-Haddad A, Che Ab Aziz ZA. Bioceramic-based root canal sealers: a review. International Journal of biomaterials. 2016;2016(1):9753210.
  27. Chellapandian K, Reddy TV, Venkatesh V, et al. Bioceramic root canal sealers: a review. Int J Health Sci 2022;6(S3):5693–5706.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.