Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Apr 23;16(9):3309.
doi: 10.3390/ma16093309.

Dentinal Tubule Penetrability and Bond Strength of Two Novel Calcium Silicate-Based Root Canal Sealers

Karissa Shieh  1 , Jack Yang  1 , Elsa Heng Zhu  1 , Ove Andreas Peters  1 , Sepanta Hosseinpour  1
Affiliations

Dentinal Tubule Penetrability and Bond Strength of Two Novel Calcium Silicate-Based Root Canal Sealers

Karissa Shieh et al. Materials (Basel). .

Abstract

Background: Once the chemo-mechanical preparation of root canals is finished, achieving a complete seal of the root canal system becomes crucial in determining the long-term success of endodontic treatment. The important goals of root canal obturation are to minimize leakage and achieve an adequate seal. Thus, a material that possesses satisfactory mechanical characteristics, is biocompatible, and has the ability to penetrate the dentine tubules adequately is needed.

Aim: This study aimed to compare the penetrability and bond strength between two calcium silicate-based sealers and an epoxy resin-based sealer, as well as examine the relationship between penetrability and bond strength for the different sealers.

Method and materials: Thirty-nine recently extracted single-rooted human premolar teeth were instrumented and divided evenly into three groups (n = 13), according to the sealer used for obturation: AH Plus Jet, EndoSequence, and AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer. Three teeth (30 slices) were randomly selected out of each for analysis using confocal laser scanning microscopy to assess penetrability. The remaining ten teeth (90 slices) in each group were subject to push-out tests using a universal testing machine. All teeth were sectioned into nine transverse slices of 0.9 mm thickness for their respective tests (apical, middle, coronal).

Results: AH Plus Jet exhibited significantly lower penetrability and significantly higher bond strength compared to EndoSequence BC sealer (p = 0.002) and AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer (p = 0.006). There was no significant difference between EndoSequence BC sealer and AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer in terms of either penetrability or bond strength. No correlation was found between penetrability and bond strength.

Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study and regardless of the location in the canal, the bioceramic based root canal sealers appeared to perform better than the epoxy resin-based sealer in terms of dentinal penetration rate. Further studies are required to compare other biomechanical properties of bioceramic sealers including setting characteristics and bacterial leakage.

Keywords: bond strength; calcium silicate-based sealer; confocal; penetration; push-out test.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ove A. Peters has a voluntary involvement and collaboration with the Dentsply Sirona company, which also generously helped us with providing samples for research purposes. This research did not receive any other financial support from any companies, and all other authors declared no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Comparison of mean penetrability (%) between sealers at different root canal thirds (coronal, middle, apical). There was no significant difference within the groups (One-way ANOVA-Tukey’s test post hoc, p > 0.05).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Representative CLSM images showing the penetrability of the three different root canal sealers: (a) AH Plus, (b) EndoSequence, and (c) AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer. (d) Higher magnification on a specimen obturated with EndoSequence showing additional features within the image: A: artefact (debris from cutting), T: sealer in dentine tubule, S: Sealer, V: void, D: dentine; GP: gutta-percha.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparison of mean bond strength [14] between sealers at different root canal thirds (coronal, middle, apical). * indicates a statistically significant difference (One-way ANOVA-Tukey’s test post hoc, p < 0.05).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Sfeir G., Zogheib C., Patel S., Giraud T., Nagendrababu V., Bukiet F. Calcium silicate-based root canal sealers: A narrative review and clinical perspectives. Materials. 2021;14:3965. doi: 10.3390/ma14143965. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Komabayashi T., Colmenar D., Cvach N., Bhat A., Primus C., Imai Y. Comprehensive review of current endodontic sealers. Dent. Mater. Mater. J. 2020;39:703–720. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2019-288. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gunes B., Yeter K.Y., Terlemez A., Seker B., Altay Y. Dentinal tubule penetration of endodontic sealers after nonthermal plasma treatment: A confocal laser scanning microscopy study. Microsc. Res. Tech. 2019;82:903–908. doi: 10.1002/jemt.23237. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chang S.W., Lee Y.-K., Zhu Q., Shon W.J., Lee W.C., Kum K.Y., Baek S.H., Lee I.B., Lim B.-S., Bae K.S. Comparison of the rheological properties of four root canal sealers. Int. J. Oral Sci. 2015;7:56–61. doi: 10.1038/ijos.2014.33. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Donnermeyer D., Bürklein S., Dammaschke T., Schäfer E. Endodontic sealers based on calcium silicates: A systematic review. Odontology. 2019;107:421–436. doi: 10.1007/s10266-018-0400-3. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources