Push-out strength of methacrylate resin-based sealers to root canal walls

P>Aim To assess the push-out strength of Epiphany SE, Epiphany and Hybrid Root SEAL to the dentine walls of root canals. Methodology Sixty roots of canines were prepared and distributed to six groups (n = 10) according to the filling material: GI - Epiphany SE, GII - Epiphany primer and sealer, GIII - Epiphany primer, sealer and resinous solvent, GIV - Clearfil DC Bond and Epiphany sealer, GV - Clearfil, Epiphany sealer and solvent and GVI - Hybrid Root SEAL. Resilon cones were used in all groups. Roots were sectioned transversally to obtain three slices from each third. One slice was subjected to the push-out test (MPa), and results were analysed by anova and Tukey`s test (P < 0.05). The other two slices were prepared for scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Failure mode was also analysed. Results A statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) occurred between Hybrid Root SEAL (5.27 +/- 2.07) and the other materials, GI (0.40 +/- 0.23), GII (0.78 +/- 0.45), GIII (0.57 +/- 0.28), GIV (0.40 +/- 0.24) and GV (0.50 +/- 0.41), which did not differ significantly from each other (P > 0.05). Adhesive failures predominated in groups I, II, IV and V, whilst mixed and cohesive failures were the most frequent in groups III and VI, respectively. There were gaps in the adhesive interface of GI and GII, continuity areas of the filling material with dentine in GIV and GV and good adaptation of the interface of GVI. Conclusion Hybrid Root SEAL had greater push-out strength to root canal dentine than Epiphany SE and Epiphany. The use of primer, solvent and adhesive system did not influence the adhesion of Epiphany.

Quantitative 3D profilometry and SEM analysis of the adaptation of root-end filling materials placed under an optical microscope

P>Aim To evaluate by 3D profilometry and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the marginal adaptation of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Sealer 26 placed in root-end cavities with direct vision or under an optical microscope. Methodology The root ends of 52 root filled canine teeth were filled with MTA or Sealer 26 under direct vision or optical microscope (n = 13). In each group, eight specimens were analysed by profilometry for measurement of the area and depth of gaps. In the other five specimens, gap area was measured using SEM to verify marginal adaptation and surface characteristic. Data were analysed by parametric (anova and Tukey) and non-parametric (Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn) tests. Results The assessment of the adaptation of both materials to dentine was not influenced by the mode of visualization, which was confirmed by both profilometry and SEM observations. The voids measured with profilometry for Sealer 26 under direct vision were significantly wider and deeper than those for MTA under direct vision (P < 0.05). In SEM, significantly larger gap areas were observed with Sealer 26 (P < 0.05). Conclusion Root-end cavities filled with MTA had smaller gaps and better marginal adaptation than Sealer 26.