The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Assessment of the Dentinal Surface Adaptation Efficacy of Different Obturation Systems with Bioceramic Sealer: A Scanning Electron Microscope Study

Abhinav Kumar Singh, Shilpa Mailankote, Rethi Gopakumar, Mahesh Jayachandran

Keywords : Bioceramic sealer, Dentinal adaptation, Obturation systems, Scanning electron microscope

Citation Information : Singh AK, Mailankote S, Gopakumar R, Jayachandran M. Assessment of the Dentinal Surface Adaptation Efficacy of Different Obturation Systems with Bioceramic Sealer: A Scanning Electron Microscope Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (8):834-838.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3345

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 29-11-2022

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


Aim: Aim of this study was to evaluate the dentinal surface adaptation effectiveness of different obturation methods with bioceramic sealer. Materials and methods: Sixty recently removed human permanent premolars of the mandible having a solitary, straight as well as completely produced root were chosen on the basis of clinical/radiographic evaluation. The coronal parts of the premolars were subjected to sectioning at the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) with the aid of a water-cooled diamond disk. The regular access opening was done, following which the working length was visually estimated by deducting 1 mm from the length of a 10 size K-file (Dentsply, OK, USA) at the apex. Subsequent to preparing the radicular canal, the premolar specimens were randomly allocated to one of the following three groups. Group I: Lateral compaction (LC) technique; group II: Warm vertical compaction (WVC) technique; and group III: Thermafil obturation technique. Following obturation, the samples were subjected to sectioning in the horizontal direction at three dissimilar points as follows: First at the cervical third, then at the middle, and at the apical third employing a minitom under water irrigation to put off overheating. Internal spaces amid the radicular dentin as well as the obturating agents were appraised with the use of a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Results: Intragroup analysis showed that higher gaps were noted at the coronal level (2.30 ± 0.04), in pursuit by middle part (1.12 ± 0.02) and apical third (0.70 ± 0.02) for the LC method. With the WVC procedure, higher gaps were situated in the coronal level (1.96 ± 0.07), again in pursuit by middle part (1.02 ± 0.02) and apical third (0.86 ± 0.04). Even with the Thermafil obturation method, higher gaps were noted at the coronal level (0.92 ± 0.10), in pursuit by middle part (0.67 ± 0.05) and apical third (0.57 ± 0.01). No statistically significant difference was noted within the group. Upon intergroup comparative assessment of dentinal surface adaptation with dissimilar obturation systems at coronal, middle and apical thirds, there was a statistically noteworthy disparity amid the groups (p <0.001). Conclusion: This research arrived at a conclusion that the most superior dentinal adaptation of bioceramic sealer was procured when the Thermafil obturation method was employed for obturating the root canals compared to the WVC technique as well as the LC technique. Clinical significance: Numerous endodontic substances have been promoted for obturating the root canal areas. Majority of the methods use a core substance, in addition to a sealer. Despite the type of core agent, a sealer indispensable to each technique offers a fluid-tight sealing. The oral physicians’ comprehension of the characteristics of the endodontic sealer plus method used, enhances the therapeutic effect.

  1. Kabini SN, Moodley DS, Parker ME, et al. An in-vitro comparative micro-computed tomographic evaluation of three obturation systems. South Afr Dent J 2018;73(4):216–220.
  2. Li GH, Niu LN, Selem LC, et al. Quality of obturation achieved by an endodontic core–carrier system with crosslinked gutta-percha carrier in single-rooted canals. J Dent 2014;42(9):1124–1134. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.04.008.
  3. Upadhyay V, Upadhyay M, Panday RK, et al. A SEM evaluation of dentinal adaptation of root canal obturation with GuttaFlow and conventional obturating material. Indian J Dent Res 2011;22(6):881. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.94696.
  4. Farias AB, Pereira KF, Beraldo DZ, et al. Efficacy of three thermoplastic obturation techniques in filling oval-shaped root canals. Acta Odontol Lantinoam 2016;29(1):76–81. PMID: 27701502.
  5. Aminsobhani M, Ghorbanzadeh A, Sharifian M. Comparison of obturation quality in modified continuous wave compaction, continuous wave compaction, lateral compaction and warm vertical compaction techniques. J Dent 2015;12(2):99–108. PMCID: PMC4434133.
  6. Leonardo MV, Goto EH, Torres CRG, et al. Assessment of the apical seal of root canals using different filling techniques. J Oral Sci 2009;51(4):593–599. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.51.593.
  7. Guo–hua Li, Li–na Niu, Wei Zhang, et al. Ability of new obturation materials to improve the seal of the root canal system: A review. Acta Biomaterialia Int J 2014;10(3):1050–1063. DOI: 10.1016/j.actbio.2013.11.015.
  8. Mamootil K, Messer HH. Penetration of dentinal tubules by endodontic sealer cements in extracted teeth and in vivo. Int Endod J 2007;40(1):873–881. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01307.x.
  9. Akcay M, Arslan H, Durmus N, et al. Dentinal tubule penetration of AHplus, IRootSP, MTA fillapex, and guttaflow bioseal root canal sealers after different final irrigation procedures: A confocal microscopic study. Lasers Surg Med 2016;48(1):70–76. DOI: 10.1002/lsm.22446.
  10. Al–Haddad A, Che Ab Aziz ZA. Bioceramic-based root canal sealers: A review. Int J Biomater 2016;20:1–10. DOI: 10.1155/2016/9753210.
  11. Gordon MP, Love RM, Chandler NP. An evaluation of 0.06 tapered gutta-percha cones for filling of 0.06 taper prepared curved root canals. International Endod J 2005;38(2):87–96. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00903.x.
  12. Xu Q, Ling J, Cheung GS, et al. A quantitative evaluation of sealing ability of 4 obturation techniques by using a glucose leakage test. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007;104(4):e109–e113. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.05.014.
  13. Venturi M, Breschi L. Evaluation of apical filling after warm vertical gutta-percha compaction using different procedures. J Endod 2004;30(6):436–440. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200406000-00015.
  14. Basavanna R, Dhanya Kumar N, et al. Effectiveness of four different gutta percha techniques in filling experimental internal resorptive lesions: An in vitro study. Endod 2014;26:128–136. DOI: 10.4103/0970-7212.352341.
  15. Arikatla SK, Chalasani U, Mandava J, et al. Interfacial adaptation and penetration depth of bioceramic endodontic sealers. J Conserv Dent 2018;21(4):373–377. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_64_18.
  16. Athkuri S, Mandava J, Chalasani U, et al. Effect of different obturating techniques and sealers on the removal of filling materials during endodontic retreatment. J Conserv Dent 2019;22(6):578–582. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_241_19.
  17. Samadi F, Jaiswal JN, Saha S, et al. A comparative evaluation of efficacy of different obturation techniques used in root canal treatment of anterior teeth: An in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2014;7(1):1–5. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1224.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.