Comparing dentinal tubule penetration of conventional and ‘HiFlow’ bioceramic sealers with resin‐based sealer: An in vitro study

This study compared the depth and percentage of dentinal tubule penetration for single‐cone (SC) and warm vertical (WV) obturation techniques with two different bioceramic sealers (BC Sealer [BCS], BC Sealer HiFlow [BCSHF]) and an epoxy resin‐based sealer (2Seal easymiX). Fifty canals were filled wi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Australian endodontic journal 2020-12, Vol.46 (3), p.387-393
Main Authors: Reynolds, John Z., Augsburger, Robert A., Svoboda, Kathy K.H., Jalali, Poorya
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
confocal microscopy
Dental restorative materials
Dental roots
Dentin
Dentistry
Endodontics
Epoxy Resins
epoxy resin‐based root canal sealer
Root Canal Filling Materials
Root Canal Obturation
Sealing compounds
Statistical analysis
Teeth
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study compared the depth and percentage of dentinal tubule penetration for single‐cone (SC) and warm vertical (WV) obturation techniques with two different bioceramic sealers (BC Sealer [BCS], BC Sealer HiFlow [BCSHF]) and an epoxy resin‐based sealer (2Seal easymiX). Fifty canals were filled with BCS, BCSHF or resin‐based sealer (RBS). Teeth in BCS and BCSHF groups were filled with SC or WV techniques, and teeth in the control group (RBS) filled with WV technique only. The roots were sectioned at 3 mm and 6 mm levels from the apex and evaluated with a confocal laser microscope. There was significantly greater depth and percentage of sealer penetration at the 6 mm section compared to 3 mm (P  0.05). In conclusion, dentinal tubule penetration was similar comparing BC Sealer, BC Sealer HiFlow and RBS using SC and WV techniques.
ISSN:1329-1947
1747-4477
DOI:10.1111/aej.12425