Comparison of apical sealing ability of three bioceramic root canal sealers in vitro.
10.7518/hxkq.2025.2024289
- Author:
Jingya ZHU
1
;
Rihong HUANG
1
;
Xiangni ZENG
1
;
Li JIANG
1
;
Fei HE
1
Author Information
1. Dept. of Stomatology, Shenzhen People's Hospital (The Second Clinical College of Jinan University, The First Affiliated Hospital of Southern University of Science and Technology), Shenzhen 518020, China.
- Publication Type:English Abstract
- Keywords:
apical sealing ability;
root canal sealer;
root canal therapy
- MeSH:
Root Canal Filling Materials/chemistry*;
Humans;
Gutta-Percha;
Microscopy, Electron, Scanning;
Root Canal Obturation/methods*;
Ceramics;
Dimethylpolysiloxanes;
Drug Combinations
- From:
West China Journal of Stomatology
2025;43(2):204-211
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVES:We aimed to compare the apical sealing properties of three endodontic sealers, namely, C-Root SP (C-R), iRoot SP, and GuttaFlow Bioseal (GFB) in vitro.
METHODS:Eighty-two single-rooted premolars and anterior teeth were prepared by using M3 machine with nickel-titanium file and randomly divided into six experimental groups (n=12) and two control groups (n=5). Group A1: single-cone technique (SC)+C-R; group B1: SC+iRoot SP; group C1: SC+GFB; group A2: single-cone with ultrasonic activation (SU)+C-R; group B2: SU+iRoot SP; group C2: SU +GFB; group D: positive control group, and group E: negative control group. Dye penetration length and lateral root canal filling in each group were measured by dye penetration test. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used to observe the interface between gutta pertscha, root canal sealer, and dentin wall. Dye penetration length was measured and analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test, and data on lateral root canal filling were evaluated using Chi-square.
RESULTS:The dye penetration length in group A1 was lower than that in groups C1 and A2 (P<0.05) but was not significantly different from the other groups (P>0.05). Lateral root canal filling was not significantly different among all groups (P>0.05). SEM showed that GFB was slightly better than C-R and iRoot SP in binding to gutta pertcha and dentin wall.
CONCLUSIONS:GFB, C-R, and iRoot SP demonstrate excellent apical sealing ability. Under the conditions tested in this study, SU did not yield significantly improve the apical sealing ability of the three root canal sealers.
