Citation Information :
Sebastian VM, Nasreen F, Junjanna P, Hassan A, Rajasekhar R, Maratt VH. Comparative Evaluation of Root Reinforcement Using MTA-based, Epoxy Resin-based, and Silicone-based Endodontic Sealers in Canals Instrumented with Single-file Rotary System: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2021; 22 (10):1098-1104.
Aim: To evaluate root reinforcement by four different sealers, namely, AH Plus, MTA Fillapex, Dia-ProSeal, and GuttaFlow 2, on endodontically treated teeth.
Materials and methods: Sixty human mandibular premolars were randomly divided into four groups of 15 teeth each, according to the type of sealer used: Group I AH Plus, Group II MTA Fillapex, Group III Dia-ProSeal, and Group IV GuttaFlow 2. All samples were decoronated to a length of 13 mm from the apex. Root canals were prepared by OneShape, 25/0.06 taper file and obturated with a matching single cone gutta percha (25/0.06) using the above-mentioned sealers. All samples were subjected to load by universal testing machine until a point at which root fractured, which was recorded.
Results: Teeth obturated with GuttaFlow 2 showed the maximum fracture resistance followed by AH Plus, Dia-ProSeal, and MTA Fillapex. There was no significant difference in fracture resistance between AH Plus and Dia-ProSeal.
Conclusion: Teeth obturated with GuttaFlow 2 sealer, which has powdered gutta percha particles, showed the highest fracture resistance.
Clinical significance: According to the results obtained from this study, obturation of roots with GuttaFlow 2 increased the resistance of root canal-filled teeth to vertical root fracture.
Hammad M, Qualtrough A, Silikas N. Effect of new obturating materials on vertical root fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Endod 2007;33(6):732–736. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007. 02.004.
Tang W, Wu Y, Smales RJ. Identifying and reducing risks for potential fractures in endodontically treated teeth. J Endod 2010;36(4):609–617. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.12.002.
Kıvanç BH, Alaçam T, Ulusoy ÖİA, et al. Fracture resistance of thin-walled roots restored with different post systems. Int Endod J 2009;42(11):997–1003. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01609.x.
Langalia AK, Dave B, Patel N, et al. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth obturated with resin based adhesive sealers with conventional obturation technique: an in vitro study. J Int Oral Health 2015;7(2):6–12. PMID: 25859099; PMCID: PMC4377154.
Patil P, Banga KS, Pawar AM, et al. Influence of root canal obturation using gutta percha with three different sealers on root reinforcement of endodontically treated teeth: an in vitro comparative study of mandibular incisors. J Conserv Dent 2017;20(4):241–244. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_233_16.
Versluis A, Messer HH, Pintado MR. Changes in compaction stress distribution in roots resulting from canal preparation. Int Endod J 2006;39(12):931–939. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01164.x.
Phukan AH, Mathur S, Sandhu M, et al. The effect of different root canal sealers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth-in vitro study. Dent Res J 2017;14(6):382–388. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.218558.
Teixeira FB, Teixeira EC, Thompson JY, et al. Fracture resistance of roots endodontically treated with a new resin filling material. J Am Dent Assoc 2004;135(5):646–652. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2004.0255.
Topçuoğlu HS, Tuncay Ö, Karataş E, et al. In vitro fracture resistance of roots obturated with epoxy resin-based, mineral trioxide aggregate-based, and bioceramic root canal sealers. J Endod 2013;39(12): 1630–1633. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.07.034.
Tyagi S, Tyagi P, Mishra P. Evolution of root canal sealers: an insight story. Eur J Gen Dent 2013;2(3):199–215. DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.115976.
Coltene/Whaledent: GuttaFlow 2 brochure. 2012. Available from: www.coltene.com.
Song YS, Choi Y, Lim MJ, et al. In vitro evaluation of a newly produced resin-based endodontic sealer. Restor Dent Endod 2016;41(3):189–195. DOI: 10.5395/rde.2016.41.3.189.
Ghoneim AG, Lutfy RA, Sabet NE, et al. Resistance to fracture of roots obturated with novel canal-filling systems. J Endod 2011;37(11):1590–1592. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.08.008.
Schäfer E, Zandbiglari T, Schäfer J. Influence of resin based adhesive root canal filling on the resistance to fracture of endodontically treated roots. An invitro preliminary study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;103(2):274–279. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.06.054.
Sağsen B, Ustün Y, Pala K, et al. Resistance to fracture of roots filled with different sealers. Dent Mater J 2012;31(4):528–532. PMID: 22864204.
Weiger R, Heuchert T, Hahn R, et al. Adhesion of a glass ionomer cement to human radicular dentine. Endod Dent Traumatol 1995;11(5):214–219. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1995.tb00491.x.
White RR, Goldman M, Lin PS. The influence of the smeared layer upon dentinal tubule penetration by plastic filling materials. J Endod 1984;10(12):558–562. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(84)80100-4.
Savariz A, González-Rodríguez MP, Ferrer-Luque CM. Long-term sealing ability of GuttaFlow versus Ah Plus using different obturation techniques. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2010;15(6):936–941. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.15.e936.
Saw LH, Messer HH. Root strains associated with different obturation techniques. J Endod 1995;21(6):314–320. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81008-3.
Reyes-Carmona JF, Felippe MS, Felippe WT. Biomineralization ability and interaction of mineral trioxide aggregate and white Portland cement with dentine in a phosphate containing fluid. J Endod 2009;35(5):731–736. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.02.011.
Saygili G, Saygili S, Tuglu I, et al. In vitro cytotoxicity of GuttaFlow, Bioseal, GuttaFlow 2, AH-Plus and MTA Fillapex. Iran Endod J 2017;12(3):354–359. DOI: 10.22037/iej.v12i3.15415.
Heydecke G, Butz F, Strub JR. Fracture strength and survival rate of endodontically treated maxillary incisors with approximal cavities after restoration with different post and core systems: an in-vitro study. J Dent 2000;29(6):427–433. DOI: 10.1016/s0300-5712(01)00038-0.
Goyal K, Paradkar S, Saha SG, et al. A comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth obturated with four different methods of obturation: an in vitro study. Endodontology 2019;31(2):168–172. DOI: 10.4103/endo.endo_13_19.
Punjabi M, Dewan RG, Kochhar R. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of root canals obturated with four different obturating systems. J Conserv Dent 2017;20(6):445–450. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_217_17.
Mohammed YT, Al-Zaka IM. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth obturated with different root canal sealers (a comparative study). J Contemp Dent Pract 2020;21(5):490–493. PMID: 32690829.
Upadhyay ST, Purayil TP, Ginjupalli K. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth obturated with Pozzolan-based MTA sealer and epoxy resin-based sealer: an in vitro study. World J Dent 2017;8(1):37–40. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1407.
Mandava J, Chang PC, Roopesh B, et al. Comparative evaluation of fracture resistance of root dentin to resin sealers and a MTA sealer: an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2014;17(1):53–56. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.124140.
Fisher MA, Berzins DW, Bahcall JK. An in vitro comparison of bond strength of various obturation materials to root canal dentin using a push-out test design. J Endod 2007;33(7):856–858. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.02.011.
Tanalp J, Dikbas I, Malkondu O, et al. Comparison of the fracture resistance of simulated immature permanent teeth using various canal filling materials and fiber posts. Dent Traumatol 2012;28(6): 457–464. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.2011.01098.x.