8 resultados para RoekoSeal
Resumo:
The objective of the study was to evaluate the biocompatibility of RoekoSeal sealer Roeko (Dental Products, Langenau, Germany) with the periapical tissues of dogs and compare it with AH Plus sealer (Dentsply/De Trey, Konstanz, Germany). The pulps of 32 root canals were removed, the apical cementum layer perforated, the biomechanical preparation performed, and the root canals filled by lateral condensation technique. Ninety days after the surgery, the animals were euthanized, the bone with teeth removed, and the samples prepared for histopathological analysis. In group 1 (RoekoSeal Automix), deposition of mineralized tissue was observed, with complete newly mineralized apical formed tissue in 43.8% and partial sealing in 56.2%. In group 2 (AH Plus), in 12.5% there was complete newly mineralized apical formed tissue, in 75% the sealing was partial, and in 12.5% there was no sealing (p < 0.05). There were no differences between the groups in relation to the inflammatory infiltrate; thickness of the periodontal ligament; and the resorption of dentin, cementum or bone (p > 0.05).
Resumo:
The objective of the study was to evaluate the biocompatibility of RoekoSeal sealer Roeko (Dental Products, Langenau, Germany) with the periapical tissues of dogs and compare it with AH Plus sealer (Dentsply/De Trey, Konstanz, Germany). The pulps of 32 root canals were removed, the apical cementum layer perforated, the biomechanical preparation performed, and the root canals filled by lateral condensation technique. Ninety days after the surgery, the animals were euthanized, the bone with teeth removed, and the samples prepared for histopathological analysis. In group 1 (RoekoSeal Automix), deposition of mineralized tissue was observed, with complete newly mineralized apical formed tissue in 43.8% and partial sealing in 56.2%. In group 2 (AH Plus), in 12.5% there was complete newly mineralized apical formed tissue, in 75% the sealing was partial, and in 12.5% there was no sealing (p < 0.05). There were no differences between the groups in relation to the inflammatory infiltrate; thickness of the periodontal ligament; and the resorption of dentin, cementum or bone (p > 0.05).
Resumo:
P>Aim To evaluate the kinetics of the inflammatory tissue response to three root canal sealers using a physicochemical method for quantification of the enhanced vascular permeability and histopathological analysis. Methodology Twenty-eight male Wistar rats randomly assigned to four groups according to the evaluation periods (1, 3, 7 and 14 days) were used to assess the vascular permeability and histopathological reaction to RoekoSeal, AH Plus and Sealapex (new formulation) sealers, using saline and Chloropercha as negative and positive controls, respectively. Seven rats were sacrificed per period. The biocompatibility of the sealers was evaluated spectrophotometrically and histopathologically. Results At day 14, Sealapex produced significantly more inflammatory exudate than AH Plus and RoekoSeal (P < 0.05); however, there was no significant difference between AH Plus and RoekoSeal (P > 0.05). Sealapex (new formulation) was the most irritating sealer, producing severe inflammation with the presence of multinucleated giant cells. RoekoSeal was the most biocompatible sealer, producing the least amount of inflammatory exudate. Conclusions RoekoSeal root canal sealer was biocompatible when implanted in connective tissue.
Resumo:
Introduction: Biocompatibility of root canal sealers is important because of the long-term contact of their eluates and/or degradation products with periapical tissues. The literature still lacks studies about the genotoxic effects of these materials and the influence of setting time on biological properties. The cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of an epoxy resin-based sealer (AH Plus), a single methacrylate-based sealer (EndoRez), and a silicone-based sealer (RoekoSeal) were assessed. Methods: Chinese hamster fibroblasts (V79) were cultured and exposed to different dilutions of extracts from the sealers that were left to set for 0, 12, and 24 hours before contact with culture medium. Cell viability was measured by the methyl-thiazol-diphenyltetrazolium assay. Genotoxicity was assessed by the comet assay. Data were statistically analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (P < .05). Results: Root canal sealers were statistically more cytotoxic than the untreated control group, except for the silicon-based sealer. Cell viability ranking was the following (from the most to the least cytotoxic): methacrylate-based > epoxy resin-based > silicone-based. The setting time influenced the epoxy resin-based sealer cytotoxicity (decreased at 12 hours) and the general genotoxicity (increased at 24 hours). DNA damage ranking was the following (from the most to the least genotoxic): methacrylate-based > silicone-based = epoxy resin-based. Conclusions: The setting time had influence on the cytotoxicity of the epoxy resin-based sealer and genotoxicity of all tested sealers. The methacrylate-based sealer was the most cytotoxic, and the silicone-based sealer was not cytotoxic. Genotoxicity was observed for all sealers. © 2013 American Association of Endodontists.
Resumo:
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
Resumo:
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
Resumo:
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
Resumo:
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
