No abstract

No abstract

Objective:The objective of this study was to compare the coronal microleakage intraorifice barrier materials, called CoroSeal (CS), fissur sealant (FS), flowable composite FC, and policarboksilate cement (PC), by using the computerized fluid filtration method.Materials and Methods:Fifty freshly extracted, single-canal human maxillary central teeth were used in this study. The teeth were decoronated to a standardized root length of 15 mm. After preparation and irrigation, all the teeth were obturated with gutta-percha and AH-Plus. In all teeth, the coronal 2 mm of root filling was removed and replaced with one of the intraorifice barriers. According to intraorifice barriers, teeth were divided randomly into 4 experimental groups (n = 10) and 2 control groups (n = 5). Group 1: CS; Group 2: FS; Group 3: FC; and Group 4: PC.Positive Control Group:No barrier material was used.Negative Control Group:Roots were completely coated with the nail polish, including the orifice. Leakage was evaluated by using a computerized fluid filtration model. Differences in fluid filtration among groups were subjected to statistical analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis Test and multiple comparisons test.Results:A value of P < 0.05 was statistically significant. Statistical analysis has indicated that the CS leaked significantly less than other groups (P < 0.05). There was a significant difference between FS and PC (P < 0.05), in contrast there was no significant difference between FS and FC (P > 0.05).Conclusions:Using the CS material as an intraorrifice barrier material reduced amount of microleakage as compared with FS, FC, and PC.

There is a little information about the influence of antibiotic medicaments on the bond strength of root canal sealer. These findings suggest that the use of DAP does not affect the adhesion strength of AH Plus, MTA Fillapex, and Total Fill BC Sealers.

Objective:The purpose of this study was to evaluate fracture resistance of teeth with immature apices treated with coronal placement of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), bioaggregate (BA), and Biodentine.Materials and Methods:Forty-one freshly extracted, single-rooted human premolar teeth were used for the study. At first, the root length was standardized to 9 mm. The crown-down technique was used for the preparation of the root canals using the rotary ProTaper system (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) of F3 (30). Peeso reamer no. 6 was stepped out from the apex to simulate an incompletely formed root. The prepared roots were randomly assigned to one control (n = 5) and three experimental (n = 12) groups, as described below. Group 1: White MTA (Angelus, Londrina, Brazil) was prepared as per the manufacturer's instructions and compacted into the root canal using MAP system (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and condensed by pluggers (Angelus, Londrina, Brazil). Group 2: The canals were filled with DiaRoot-BA (DiaDent Group International, Canada). Group 3: Biodentine (Septodont, Saint Maur des Fosses, France) solution was mixed with the capsule powder and condensed using pluggers. Instron was used to determine the maximum horizontal load to fracture the tooth, placing the tip 3 mm incisal to the cementoenamel junction. Mean values of the fracture strength were compared by ANOVA followed by a post hoc test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results:No significant difference was observed among the MTA, BA, and biodentine experimental groups.Conclusion:All the three materials tested, may be used as effective strengthening agents for immature teeth.

Gutta-percha solvents used during retreatment decreased the bond strength of Biodentine and CMTA to root dentin. The bond strength of WMTA was not affected by the use of gutta-percha solvents.

Aim:To evaluate the solubility of five different root canal sealers (AH Plus Jet, RealSeal SE, MTA Fillapex, Tubli-Seal, and Acroseal) in chloroform, eucalyptol and Endosolv-E solvents. Materials and methods:Ninety root canal sealer samples were prepared and then divided into three groups for immersion in a solvent for 2, 5 or 10 minutes. The mean values of the root canal sealers' dissolution in the solvents were obtained by the difference between the preimmersion original weight and the post-immersion weight on a digital analytical scale. Data were statistically analyzed by a Kruskal-Wallis test with a Bonferroni correction. Results:Chloroform was a more effective solvent than eucalyptol or Endosolv E for all root canal sealers, except for RealSeal SE, at all time points (p < 0.003). RealSeal SE was the least soluble sealer in all solvents at all time points. Conclusion:Chloroform demonstrated a superior ability over other solvents in dissolving canal sealing materials, and eucalyptol was found to be the least effective solvent in this study. Clinical significance:This study can help to the clinicians about which solvent should be preferred for solving the filling materials in retreatment cases.

The aim of this paper is to report the healing of two large periapical lesions following non-surgical root canal treatment. The first case was a mandibular right lateral with periapical lesion of endodontic origin in a 40 year-old female patient with extra oral fistula and swelling. In the second case, a mandibular right central incisor was affected in a 22 year-old male patient. The root canals were prepared and filled with calcium hydroxide as an intra-canal medicament. The patients were recalled for clinical evaluation at intervals of 3 weeks. Root canals obturations were performed with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. The clinical and radiographic examination after 1 year revealed complete repair. This report confirms that large periapical lesions can respond favourably to nonsurgical treatment.