An In Vitro Comparison of Bond Strength of Various Obturation Materials to Root Canal Dentin Using a Push-Out Test Design

2007 ◽  
Vol 33 (7) ◽  
pp. 856-858 ◽  
Author(s):  
M FISHER ◽  
D BERZINS ◽  
J BAHCALL
2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-32
Author(s):  
Vasundhara Shivanna ◽  
Ravi Bhargavi

ABSTRACT Objectives The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the effect of calcium hydroxide [Ca(OH)2], 2% chlorhexidine (CHX) gel, and propolis when used as intracanal medicaments on the bond strength of a resin-based sealer (AH Plus Jet; Dentsply DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany) to the root dentin. Materials and methods Sixty freshly extracted single-rooted human teeth were utilized for this study and the crowns were decoronated. The root canals were instrumented and randomized into four groups according to the medicament used: Group I: Control; group II: Ca(OH)2; group III: CHX; group IV: Propolis. The specimens were stored for 10 days in 100% humidity at 37°C, and the intracanal dressings were removed by rinsing with 10 mL of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid followed by 10 mL of 2.5% sodium hypochlorite, then obturated with gutta-percha and AH Plus Jet sealer. A push-out test to measure the bond strength between the root canal dentin and the sealer was done. Two-way analysis of variance and Tukey’s post hoc pairwise tests were used for statistical analysis. Results The use of intracanal medicaments had shown to significantly influence the push-out bond strengths of the resin sealer used (p < 0.05). At coronal and middle thirds, there was no significant difference in bond strengths among all the four groups (p > 0.05). At apical third, the mean bond strength value for propolis group was significantly superior when compared with the other three groups (p < 0.05). The CHX group showed higher bond strength values at apical third compared with Ca(OH)2 and control groups, but it was not significant (p > 0.05). Conclusion Propolis showed superior push-out bond strength than CHX, Ca(OH)2, and control groups at apical third, while no significant differences were observed among all the groups at coronal and middle thirds. How to cite this article Shivanna V, Bhargavi R. An in vitro Comparison of the Effect of Three Different Endodontic Medicaments on the Bond Strength of a Resin-based Endodontic Sealer to the Root Canal Dentin. CODS J Dent 2016;8(1):28-32.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Esma Saricam ◽  
◽  
Neslihan Bulak ◽  
Esra Özyurt ◽  
Suat Özcan ◽  
...  

Eliminating microorganisms in the root canal system is important for the success of regenerative endodontics. Objective: This study evaluated the effects of different antibiotic pastes used for regenerative endodontic procedures on dentin microhardness and the push-out bond strength of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) to root canal dentin. Methods: Sixty-four maxillary central incisors were instrumented and randomly divided into the following four groups (n = 16) for medicament treatment: triple antibiotic paste, amoxicillin+clavulanic acid, cefaclor, and control (no dressing). After 21 days, two root segments were obtained by sectioning the roots horizontally for push-out and microhardness evaluations. MTA was placed into the root canal of the sectioned segment for the push-out test. In the microhardness evaluation, three indentations were made at 500 and 1,000 μm from the canal lumen. The arithmetic mean was then calculated for each distance. ANOVA with post hoc Scheffe test and t test were used for the statistical analyses. The significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results: No significant difference was found between the groups in terms of push-out bond strength (p > 0.05). Cefaclor and amoxicillin+clavulanic acid reduced the microhardness values of the dentin at 500 μm (p < 0.05) while cefaclor had the lowest value at 1,000 μm (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Cefaclor reduced the microhardness value more than the other medicaments did at a depth of 1,000 μm. The pastes provided similar adhesion of MTA.


Author(s):  
Ebru Özsezer Demiryürek ◽  
Şafak Külünk ◽  
Duygu Saraç ◽  
Gözde Yüksel ◽  
Bilinç Bulucu

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 41
Author(s):  
Roopadevi Garlapati ◽  
KolluriMohana Chandra ◽  
PraveenKumar Gali ◽  
Bolla Nagesh ◽  
Sayesh Vemuri ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
S Rikhtegaran ◽  
S Oskoee ◽  
F Pouralibaba ◽  
M Bahary ◽  
A. Chehrebardar

2015 ◽  
Vol 114 (3) ◽  
pp. 398-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahshid Torabi Ardakani ◽  
Rashin Giti ◽  
Masume Taghva ◽  
Samane Javanmardi

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document