A methacrylate‐based cement used as a root canal sealer

Ahlberg, Kerstin; Tay, W.M.

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2591.1998.t01-1-00118.x

Cited by 33 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In several studies, different dentin bonding agents have been used as root canal sealers and their sealing abilities have been compared with common sealers. However, all bonding agent studies have had problems in working properties, radiopacity, and lack of removability when used for endodontic purposes (12,(19)(20)(21). This was expected because the materials studied were not manufactured with the intention of using them within the root canal system (22).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of microleakage following application of a dentin bonding agent as root canal sealer in the presence or absence of smear layer

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the apical leakage of roots obturated with gutta-percha using either an epoxy resin sealer (AH26) or a dual cure dentin binding agent (Excite DSC) as sealer in the presence or absence of smear layer with fluid filtration method. The canals of eighty-six, single-rooted premolars were instrumented until a #40 K-file fit at working length and then randomly divided into four groups (n = 20) with the remaining six used as controls. Groups 1 and 2 were filled with gutta-percha using AH26 as sealer; groups 3 and 4 were filled with guttapercha and Excite DSC as sealer. Groups 1 and 3 were smear layer-positive, while group 2 and 4 were designated as smear layer-negative. After 3 days and 3 months, the samples were connected to a fluid filtration system. Analysis of data with the paired t-test showed that microleakage in AH26 groups (with and without smear layer) decreased significantly at 3 months compared to 3 days; however, in the DBA groups, the amount of microleakage at 3 days and 3 months was not significantly different. According to the results of this study, DBA (Excite DSC) had better apical sealing ability and could be applied clinically. (J Oral Sci 51,

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of microleakage following application of a dentin bonding agent as root canal sealer in the presence or absence of smear layer

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With advances in etch-&-rinse and self-etching adhesive technologies [7,16], there is increasing interest in the use of low viscosity, methacrylate resin-based composites as sealers for root filling materials in endodontics [3,4,17]. The release of unreacted monomers from resin composites may stimulate the growth of bacteria [18] and promote allergic or cytotoxic reactions to intraoral tissues [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing endodontic sealers on human umbilical vein endothelial cells

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractThe toxic potential of the endodontic sealers ingredients, especially the unreacted monomer, that can irritate the periapical tissue and interfere with the healing process, thus having a negative impact on the biocompatibility of the material. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of three experimental endodontic sealers on cells viability in vitro. Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC) were used. The experiments were done with solid samples and extracts of sealers in artificial saliva and water. The experiments evaluated the cytotoxicity of the residual monomers that resulted from the tested composites. The decrease in cell viability was quantified by colorimetric measurement of formazan. The components of the sealers dissolved in artificial saliva and water were determined by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). The HUVEC are a novelty for testing the endodontic sealers biocompatibility, with certain advantages compared to other cell types used in the literature, e.g. HELA cells, fibroblasts. The data showed that cytotoxicity was directly linked with the unreacted monomer — 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) present in these composites. Two of the three formulations had little or no cytotoxic effect, which makes them suitable for further testing in order to be used in endodontic treatment.

show abstract

“…[1] Gutta-percha cones of 6% taper were used as the master cones for use with AH Plus instead of ProTaper F3 cones, to provide standardization between the groups. Quartz tungsten halogen (QTH) light source was preferred over plasma arc or light-emitting diode (LED) to obtain a better seal in case of EndoREZ.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An in vitro comparative evaluation of depth of tubular penetration of three resin-based root canal sealers

Chadha¹,

Taneja²,

Kumar³

et al. 2012

J Conserv Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:To evaluate the depth of penetration of three resin-based root canal sealers into the dentinal tubules at the cervical, middle and apical third of the root canal.Materials and Methods:Root canals of 32 extracted human mandibular premolar teeth were prepared and obturated using EndoREZ + resin-coated gutta-percha points (group A), Epiphany + Resilon points (group B), or AH Plus + gutta-percha (group C). The teeth were split longitudinally in bucco-lingual direction and viewed under scanning electron microscope. Photographs were taken at cervical, middle and apical levels for all samples and corresponding measurements were made. The data obtained was statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and the post-hoc Bonferroni test for inter-group comparison.Results:The results showed that the greatest penetration into dentinal tubules was by EndoREZ sealer (525.2 μ, 327.802 μ and 198.36 μ at cervical, middle and apical third), followed by Epiphany sealer (479.7 μ, 297.212 μ, and 182.22 μ), and the least penetration was seen with AH Plus sealer (224.2 μ, 65.419 μ, and 40.7 μ). The penetration of sealer into the dentinal tubules was statistically significant between each group at each level and between different levels within each group (P<.05).Conclusion:The penetration depth of EndoREZ and Epiphany into the dentinal tubules is significantly greater than that of AH Plus.

show abstract

A methacrylate‐based cement used as a root canal sealer

Cited by 33 publications

References 12 publications

Evaluation of microleakage following application of a dentin bonding agent as root canal sealer in the presence or absence of smear layer

Evaluation of microleakage following application of a dentin bonding agent as root canal sealer in the presence or absence of smear layer

Testing endodontic sealers on human umbilical vein endothelial cells

An in vitro comparative evaluation of depth of tubular penetration of three resin-based root canal sealers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About