Outcome of Root Canal Treatments Using a New Calcium Silicate Root Canal Sealer: A Non-Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the success rate of root canal treatments undertaken using a calcium silicate root canal sealer in combination with a single cone with non-calcium silicate cement and warm vertical condensation. Methods: 150 necrotic or pulpitic teeth were treated. (REC: 08/H0804/79). Following standardized root canal chemo-debridement. The canals were obturated using warm vertical condensation of gutta-percha and epoxy-based sealer (AH plus) or a calcium silicate sealer (BioRootTM RCS) with a single cone technique. Follow-up assessment was conducted at 12 months using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). Results: At 1-year recall, 104 teeth were assessed (51 AH plus, 53 BioRootTM RCS). The success rate using loose criteria for the CBCT images and PA radiographs was respectively 80% and 89% in the AH plus/warm vertical condensation group, 84% and 90% in the BioRootTM RCS/single cone group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (Fisher exact test p value 0.6099 for the CBCT images). Conclusion: Within the limitations of this non-randomized trial, a calcium silicate cement in combination with single cone resulted in a similar proportion of successful cases compared to warm vertical condensation and epoxy-based sealer.

Antimicrobial Effectiveness of Calcium Silicate Sealers against a Nutrient-Stressed Multispecies Biofilm

“…Endodontic sealers possessing various ideal characteristics, such as antimicrobial activity, biocompatibility, sealing ability and handling properties, may positively impact desirable clinical outcomes. The single cone technique, incorporating the use of calcium silicate sealers, has demonstrated promising clinical results [ 44 , 45 ]. Further research, however, is required to investigate calcium silicate sealers, particularly the balance between solubility and their bioactivity through prospective randomised clinical trials.…”

Wurzelkanal-Sealer – modern versus bewährt

“…Dies entspricht in etwa Erfolgsraten bei Wurzelkanalbehandlungen, die mit konventionellen Sealern zu erreichen sind. In einer vergleichenden klinischen Studie wurde nach einer Beobachtungszeit von einem Jahr kein Unterschied hinsichtlich des Behandlungserfolgs zwischen der Verwendung von AH Plus in Kombination mit warm-vertikalen Obturationstechniken und BioRoot RCS in Kombination mit der 1-Stift-Technik festgestellt [27]. Die Erfolgsraten lagen bei 89 % (AH Plus) bzw.…”

“…Die Erfolgsraten lagen bei 89 % (AH Plus) bzw. 90 % (BioRoot RCS) [27]. Auch in Bezug auf postoperative Beschwerden wurde kein Unterschied zwischen den Kalzium-Silikat-basierten Sealern (hier Total Fill BC Sealer) und AH Plus festgestellt [28,29].…”

Microcomputed Tomographic Assessment of the Single Cone Root Canal Fillings Performed by Undergraduate Student, Postgraduate Student and Specialist Endodontist

“…Additionally, due to the superior flowability, hydrophilicity and the small particle size of the material, the excellent penetrability of the sealers can be achieved even without any condensation pressure [ 19 ]. Recent clinical studies demonstrated the high clinical success rates when the SC technique was used for root canal obturation in cases of primary endodontic treatment or endodontic retreatment [ 24 , 25 ].…”

“…It has been concluded that the success rates of endodontic treatment highly depend on the quality of root canal shaping, cleaning and eradication of the microorganisms [ 1 , 2 , 14 ]. Moreover, the impact of the quality of the root canal obturation and the clinical experience of the operator has also been demonstrated [ 9 , 10 , 25 ]. The clinical success rates when treatment procedures are performed by a specialist endodontist can reach more than 90% or 95%, whereas in cases where general practitioners perform root canal treatment, the probability of the clinical success can decrease even to 40–65% [ 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 ].…”