The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 4 ( April, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Intratubular Sealer Penetration: Scanning Electron Microscopy Associated with Cathodoluminescence Analysis

Bruna A Botelho, Kauhanna V de Oliveira, Rebecca G Antunes, Natanael HR Mattos, Camila P Perin, Flares Baratto-Filho

Keywords : Endodontics, Root canal filling materials, Scanning electron microscopy

Citation Information : Botelho BA, de Oliveira KV, Antunes RG, Mattos NH, Perin CP, Baratto-Filho F. Intratubular Sealer Penetration: Scanning Electron Microscopy Associated with Cathodoluminescence Analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (4):383-387.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3330

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 11-07-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: The aim of the study was to compare the ability of three endodontic sealers, Endofill (END), AH Plus (AHP), and Sealer Plus BC (SPB), to penetrate dentinal tubules. Materials and methods: Forty-five human teeth, single-rooted and previously instrumented mandibular premolars, were randomly divided into three experimental groups (n = 15): END (n = 15), AHP (n = 15), and SPB (n = 15). After obturation, dental sections were performed horizontally, at 2 and 5 mm from the root apex. The samples were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy associated with cathodoluminescence. Percentage penetration (PP%) and maximum penetration depth (MPD) of the sealers were evaluated by the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests, for general and paired data, respectively. The Wilcoxon test was applied to analyze the differences between the 5 and 2 mm distances. A 5% significance level was adopted. Results: As for PP%, AHP and SPB were similar (p = 0.127) and presented higher values than END (AHP, p = 0.024 and SPB, p <0.001); with regard to MPD, AHP and SPB did not differ either (p = 0.450), but were higher than END (p <0.001); in both analyses, penetration was greater at 5 mm than at 2 mm (p <0.001). Conclusion: SPB showed satisfactory performance in penetrating dentinal tubules, being similar to AHP, and superior to END. Clinical significance: Greater penetration of sealer into the dentinal tubules may increase the chance of successful endodontic treatment.

PDF Share
  1. Prada I, Micó-Muñoz P, Giner-Lluesma T, et al. Influence of microbiology on endodontic failure. Literature review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2019;24(3):e364–e372. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.22907.
  2. Orhan EO, Bahadır D, Akgün C, et al. Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of the efficacy of 5% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid for smear layer removal. Microsc Res Tech 2021;84(2):253–260. DOI: 10.1002/jemt.23582.
  3. Akyuz Ekim SN, Erdemir A. Comparison of different irrigation activation techniques on smear layer removal: an in vitro study. Microsc Res Tech 2015;78(3):230–239. DOI: 10.1002/jemt.22466.
  4. van der Sluis LW, Gambarini G, Wu MK, et al. The influence of volume, type of irrigant and flushing method on removing artificially placed dentine debris from the apical root canal during passive ultrasonic irrigation. Int Endod J 2006;39(6):472–476. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01108.x.
  5. Guimarães BM, Amoroso-Silva PA, Alcalde MP, et al. Influence of ultrasonic activation of 4 root canal sealers on the filling quality. J Endod 2014;40(7):964–968. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.11.016.
  6. Wiesse PEB, Silva-Sousa YT, Pereira RD, et al. Effect of ultrasonic and sonic activation of root canal sealers on the push-out bond strength and interfacial adaptation to root canal dentine. Int Endod J 2018;51(1):102–111. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12794.
  7. Yamini B, Gali PK, Nagesh B, et al. Effect of indirect ultrasonic activation of modified bioceramic materials on the bond strength and tubular penetration in root canals. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2021;18:45. PMID: 34429865.
  8. Heling I, Chandler NP. The antimicrobial effect within dentinal tubules of four root canal sealers. J Endod 1996;22(5):257–259. DOI: 10.1016/s0099-2399(06)80144-5.
  9. Marín-Bauza GA, Silva-Sousa YT, da Cunha SA, et al. Physicochemical properties of endodontic sealers of different bases. J Appl Oral Sci 2012;20(4):455–461. DOI: 10.1590/s1678-77572012000400011.
  10. Alves Silva EC, Tanomaru-Filho M, da Silva GF, et al. Biocompatibility and bioactive potential of new calcium silicate-based endodontic sealers: Bio-C sealer and Sealer Plus BC. J Endod 2020;46(1):1470–1477. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2020.07.011.
  11. Cintra LTA, Benetti F, de Azevedo Queiroz ÍO, et al. Evaluation of the cytotoxicity and biocompatibility of new resin epoxy-based endodontic sealer containing calcium hydroxide. J Endod 2017;43(12):2088–2092. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.07.016.
  12. Vertuan GC, Duarte MAH, Moraes IG, et al. Evaluation of physicochemical properties of a new root canal sealer. J Endod 2018;44(3):501–505. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.09.017.
  13. Piai GG, Duarte MAH, Nascimento ALD, et al. Penetrability of a new endodontic sealer: a confocal laser scanning microscopy evaluation. Microsc Res Tech 2018;81(11):1246–1249. DOI: 10.1002/jemt.23129.
  14. De-Deus G, Brandó MC, Souza EM, et al. Epoxy resin-based root canal sealer penetration into dentin tubules does not improve root filling dislodgement resistance. Eur Endod J 2017;2(1):1–5. DOI: 10.5152/eej.2017.16059.
  15. Oliveira KV, Silva BMD, Leonardi DP, et al. Effectiveness of different final irrigation techniques and placement of endodontic sealer into dentinal tubules. Braz Oral Res 2017;31:e114. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2017.vol31.0114.
  16. Okşan T, Aktener BO, Sen BH, et al. The penetration of root canal sealers into dentinal tubules. A scanning electron microscopic study. Int Endod J 1993;26(5):301–305. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1993.tb00575.x.
  17. Caceres C, Larrain MR, Monsalve M, et al. Dentinal tubule penetration and adaptation of Bio-C Sealer and AH-Plus: a comparative SEM evaluation. Eur Endod J 2021;6(2):216–220. DOI: 10.14744/eej.2020.96658.
  18. Khan MT, Moeen F, Safi SZ, et al. The structural, physical, and in vitro biological performance of freshly mixed and set endodontic sealers. Eur Endod J 2021;6(1):98–109. DOI: 10.14744/eej.2020.36349.
  19. Mjör IA, Smith MR, Ferrari M, et al. The structure of dentine in the apical region of human teeth. Int Endod J 2001;34(5):346–353. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00393.x.
  20. Coenen T, Brenny BJ, Vesseur EJ, et al. Cathodoluminescence micro-scopy: optical imaging and spectroscopy with deep-subwavelength resolution. Multiscale mechanics of biological, bioinspired, and biomedical materials. MRS Bull 2015;40(4):359–365. DOI: 10.1557/mrs.2015.64.
  21. Schilder H. Filling root canals in three dimensions. Dent Clin North Am 1967;723–744. PMID: 5262492.
  22. Turkyilmaz A, Erdemir A. Comparison of dentin penetration ability of different root canal sealers used with different obturation methods. Microsc Res Tech 2020;83(12):1544–1551. DOI: 10.1002/jemt. 23548.
  23. Arslan H, Abbas A, Karatas E. Influence of ultrasonic and sonic activation of epoxy-amine resin-based sealer on penetration of sealer into lateral canals. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20(8):2161–2164. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-016-1737-z.
  24. De Bem IA, de Oliveira RA, Weissheimer T, et al. Effect of ultrasonic activation of endodontic sealers on intratubular penetration and bond strength to root dentin. J Endod 2020;46(9):1302–1308. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2020.06.014.
  25. Tedesco M, Chain MC, Felippe WT, et al. Correlation between bond strength to dentin and sealers penetration by push-out test and CLSM analysis. Braz Dent J 2019;30(6):555–562. DOI: 10.1590/0103-6440201902766.
  26. Khedmat S, Momen-Heravi F, Pishvaei M. A comparison of viscoelastic properties of three root canal sealers. J Dent (Tehran) 2013;10(2):147–154. PMID: 23724214.
  27. Garrido AD, Lia RC, França SC, et al. Laboratory evaluation of the physicochemical properties of a new root canal sealer based on Copaifera multijuga oil-resin. Int Endod J 2010;43(4):283–291. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01678.x.
  28. Bolles JA, He J, Svoboda KK, et al. Comparison of Vibringe, EndoActivator, and needle irrigation on sealer penetration in extracted human teeth. J Endod 2013;39(5):708–711. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.01.006.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.