Clinical outcome of root canal obturation using different based sealers: a retrospective cohort study
- PMID: 39725975
- PMCID: PMC11673337
- DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-05380-6
Clinical outcome of root canal obturation using different based sealers: a retrospective cohort study
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to assess and compare the performance of root canal treatment obturated either with calcium silicate-based or epoxy resin-based root canal sealers on retreatment cases with periapical lesions.
Methods: Patients' radiographic data and clinical records were obtained retrospectively from the computerized patient record system. A total of 44 teeth, 28 teeth treated with calcium silicate-based sealer and 16 teeth treated with epoxy resin-based sealer, were included in the study. The mean follow-up period was 11.9 months for calcium silicate-based sealer and 23.6 months for epoxy resin based sealer groups. The outcome was evaluated based on radiographic findings and clinical records of the patients. Chi-square test and Fisher's Exact test were used to examine the differences between categorical variables. An independent samples t-test was used to compare the initial and final PAI differences based on sealer type.
Results: The success rate was 100% for calcium silicate-based sealer and 93.75% for epoxy resin-based sealer. Calcium silicate-based sealer showed a faster healing capacity than epoxy resin-based sealer.
Conclusions: Both sealers are viable options for retreatment cases, but calcium silicate-based sealer has a faster healing potential.
Keywords: Calcium silicate-based sealer; Epoxy resin-based sealers; Non-surgical root canal treatment; Outcome.
© 2024. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: This study was approved by Sakarya University, Faculty of Medicine, Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Approval number: E-71522473-50.01.04-202827-354). The study was performed according to Helsinki Declaration. Informed consent was obtained from all patient and legal guardian of minor regarding the use of their radiologic data for scientific research. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Figures
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
