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
Comparative Study
. 2025 Oct;133(5):e70028.
doi: 10.1111/eos.70028. Epub 2025 Jul 2.

Different root canal drying protocols for AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer: An in vitro study

Andressa Weber Vargas  1 , Guilherme Pauletto  1 , Rafaela Oliveira Pilecco  2 , Luís Eduardo Cechin  3 , Gabriel Kalil Rocha Pereira  4 , Renata Dornelles Morgental  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Different root canal drying protocols for AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer: An in vitro study

Andressa Weber Vargas et al. Eur J Oral Sci. 2025 Oct.

Abstract

This study compared the bond strength of a bioceramic sealer and an epoxy resin-based sealer to root canals under different drying protocols. Seventy-two single-rooted teeth were allocated to one of three root canal drying protocols: dry; slightly moist; and wet. For each drying protocol two endodontic sealers were used: AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer (AHPB) or AH Plus (AHP) (n = 12 per combination of sealer and drying protocol). Slices of the root thirds were obtained and subjected to an immediate (1 week) and an after aging (10,000 thermal cycles) push-out test. Failure mode analysis and adhesive interface analysis were also carried out. Statistical analyses included two-way ANOVA, Tukey's post hoc test, t-test, and chi-square test. The immediate bond strength of AHP was higher than that of AHPB when the canal was slightly moist or wet. Also, a better marginal adaptation of the AHP to the root canal walls was found than that seen for AHPB. Comparing the different drying protocols within the same endodontic sealer, no differences were observed for AHP or AHPB. After aging, the bond strength decreased for AHP wet and for AHPB dry groups. Failure modes were similar among the groups. The AHP sealer demonstrated superior adhesive performance compared with AHPB, showing better results in dry root canals.

Keywords: AH Plus; bioceramics; drying protocols; push‐out.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Li GH, Niu LN, Zhang W, Olsen M, De‐Deus G, Eid AA. Ability of new obturation materials to improve the seal of the root canal system: A review. Acta Biomater. 2014;10:1050–63.
    1. Schilder H, Hargreaves KM. Filling root canals in three dimensions. Filling root canals in three dimensions. J Endod. 2006;32:281–90.
    1. Scarparo RK, Grecca FS, Fachin EVF. Analysis of tissue reactions to methacrylate resin‐based, epoxy resin‐based, and zinc oxide‐eugenol endodontic sealers. J Endod. 2009;35:229–32.
    1. Versiani MA, Carvalho JR, Padilha MIAF, Lacey S, Pascon EA, Sousa‐Neto MD. A comparative study of physicochemical properties of AH Plus™ and Epiphany™ root canal sealants. Int Endod J. 2006;39:464–71.
    1. Oh H, Kim E, Lee S, Park S, Chen D, Shin SJ. Comparison of biocompatibility of calcium silicate‐based sealers and epoxy resin‐based sealer on human periodontal ligament stem cells. Materials. 2020;13:5242. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13225242

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources