Comparison of the interface dentin-endodontic sealer using two SEM magnifications

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the interface dentin-sealer of two sealers (RealSeal and AH Plus) using two magnifications under Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). Methods: The coronal two thirds of eight extracted molars were removed and the dentin surfaces were grounded with the sequential use of #180 and #320 SIC paper under water cooling. The samples were divided into two groups of four in accordance to the sealer to be used. The dentin surfaces were treated with 17% EDTA followed by 5.25% NaOCl. Cylinders from polyethylene tubes were applied to the dentin surfaces and filled with freshly prepared sealers. Following 2h setting and storage at 37ºC at 100% humidity for a week, the teeth were cut perpendicularly to allow the visualization of the area containing the hole, thus the interface dentin-sealer. SEM analysis was done at three areas along the interface, at 150x and1000x. Results: The repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant differences between the magnifications. AH-Plus displayed significantly more gaps in the interface dentin-sealer than RealSeal. (p=0.002). The increase in magnification, from 150x to 1000x, did not allow any additional identification of gaps. Conclusion: RealSeal produced less gaps than AH Plus. It could be assumed that 150x is good enough to show defects in the interface dentin-sealer.

Evaluation of Dentin Adaptability of Fluoride Varnish as a Root Canal Sealer Using Scanning Electron Microscopy

“…Gap sizes are often reported at x2000 magnification. In a microscopic study, Steier et al [25] observed that an increase in magnification from x150 to x1000 had no significant effect on the detection of a greater number of gaps. However, in the current study, x150 magnification was first used to obtain an overview followed by x2000 magnification for enhanced accuracy.…”

“…At the time of conducting this study, no similar study seemed to be available to compare our results regarding gap size following the application of fluoride varnish as a root canal sealer. The results of some previous SEM studies showed that AH-Plus has proper dentinal adaptation [18,21,25]. Steier et al [25] evaluated the sealer-dentin interface of AH-Plus and RealSeal.…”

“…The results of some previous SEM studies showed that AH-Plus has proper dentinal adaptation [18,21,25]. Steier et al [25] evaluated the sealer-dentin interface of AH-Plus and RealSeal. According to their findings, only 21% to 30% of the cases had a visible gap [25].…”

“…Steier et al [25] evaluated the sealer-dentin interface of AH-Plus and RealSeal. According to their findings, only 21% to 30% of the cases had a visible gap [25]. Similarly, Balguerie et al [21] found no gaps between AH-Plus sealer and dentin in most of the transverse sections of the teeth.…”

Comparative apical sealing evaluation of two bioceramic endodontic sealers

“…Controversial results have been reported in the literature regarding the relation between apical marginal fit and sealing ability of endodontic materials. Some authors consider there is no correlation between sealing in the apical area and the properties of filling materials 4 , while other sustain the contrary [4]. However, considering the controversial outcomes and limitations, it appears that evaluating the apical marginal adaptation of the filling materials, i.e.…”