Fracture Resistance of Roots Obturated with Resilon and EndoREZ with Self-Adhesive Root Canal Sealers

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 569-573
Author(s):  
Ahlam Samran ◽  
Adnan Habib ◽  
Mazen Doumani ◽  
Abdulaziz Samran
Keyword(s):  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Fracture Strength ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Fourth Generation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Filling Material ◽  
Endodontically Treated Teeth ◽  
Root Canal Sealers

<sec> <title>Objective:</title> This laboratory study aimed to evaluate the effect of self-adhesive root canal sealers on the fracture strength of root canals filled with Resilon or EndoREZ. </sec> <sec> <title>Materials and Methods:</title> A total of eighty extracted mandibular premolar teeth were selected in this in-vitro study. All teeth were instrumented using a crown-down technique by FlexMaster rotary NiTi files. Specimens were divided into 4 test groups (n = 20) according to the sealer material: RS; RealSeal, RSS; RealSeal SE, MS; MetaSeal, and CG; (control group) zinc oxide eugenol-based sealer. Each main group was distributed into two subgroups (n = 10) according to the filling material either Resilon or EndoREZ and gutta-percha (n = 20) in the control group. Each root was mounted in acrylic resin blocks and subjected to fracture in a universal testing machine. The load values at root specimens fractured were registered in Newton’s and the data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and the Tukey HSD test (α = 0.05). </sec> <sec> <title>Results:</title> The two-way analysis of variance analysis indicated that the filling material had a significant effect on the fracture strength of endodontically treated teeth (p < 0.05) but not the sealer materials (p≥.05). Higher mean fracture strength was recorded in MetaSeal and Resilon group (1281.90±200.34 N) and lower mean fracture strength was shown in RealSeal and EndoREZ group (847.55±191.04 N). </sec> <sec> <title>Conclusion:</title> Self-adhesive (fourth-generation) resin sealers increased the fracture strength of root teeth more than self-etching (third-generation) root canal sealers when used with EndoREZ points. </sec>

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored with Resin Fiber Post and Stainless Steel Post: An In Vitro Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 03 (02) ◽  
pp. 080-084
Author(s):  
Vijay Singh ◽  
Poonam Bogra ◽  
Saurabh Gupta ◽  
Navneet Kukreja ◽  
Neha Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Fracture Resistance ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Compressive Force ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Fiber Post ◽  
Endodontically Treated Teeth ◽  
Group I ◽  
Significant Difference

AbstractFracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with post. Aims: This study aims to compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with resin fiber and stainless steel post. Commercially available prefabricated resin fiber post(Dentsply Maillefer Easy Post), prefabricated stainless steel post(Coltene/Whaledent Parapost) were used. Methods and Material: Forty five maxillary central incisors were obturated and divided into 3 groups: Control Group (Group I) without any post (n = 15), Resin Fiber Post Group (Group II) (n = 15) and Stainless Steel Post Group (Group III) (n = 15). In all Groups except control group, post space was prepared; a post was cemented, and a core build-up was provided. All the specimens were subjected to compressive force under a universal testing machine until fracture. Statistical analysis used: The results were analyzed using the variable analysis test (ANOVA). Results: One-way analysis of variance revealed significant difference among test groups. The control group demonstrated highest fracture resistance (925.2183 N), followed by the resin fiber post group (486.7265 N) and stainless steel post group (423.539N). Conclusions: Teeth restored with resin fiber post showed higher fracture resistance values than prefabricated stainless steel post.

Influence of Different Restoration Techniques on Fracture Resistance of Root-filled Teeth: In Vitro Investigation

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
ME Hshad ◽  
EE Dalkılıç ◽  
GC Ozturk ◽  
I Dogruer ◽  
F Koray
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Compressive Force ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Hybrid Resin ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
In Vitro Investigation ◽  
Significant Difference

SUMMARY Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the fracture strength of endodontically treated mandibular premolar teeth restored with composites and different reinforcement techniques. Methods and Materials: Forty-eight freshly extracted human mandibular premolar teeth were randomly divided into four groups: group IN, group CR, group FRC, and group PRF. Group IN consisted of teeth with intact crowns and served as the control group. In the other three groups, endodontic treatment was performed and standard mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities were prepared. Then cavities were restored with hybrid resin composite only, flowable composite and hybrid resin composite, and Ribbond, flowable composite and hybrid resin composite in groups CR, FRC and PRF, respectively. All of the teeth were subjected to fracture by means of a universal testing machine, and compressive force was applied with a modified stainless-steel ball at a crosshead speed at 0.5 mm/min. Results: The highest values were observed in group IN, while the lowest values were determined in group CR. There was not any statistically significant difference between group CR and group FCR (p&gt;0.05). When groups CR, FCR, and PRF were compared, group PRF showed significantly better fracture strength than did groups CR and FCR (p&lt;0.05). It was determined that there was not any significant difference between group IN and group PRF (p&gt;0.05). Conclusions: Polyethylene ribbon fiber considerably increases the fracture strength of mandibular premolar teeth with MOD cavities restored with composite.

scholarly journals AN INVITRO COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF FRACTURE RESISTANCE OF ENDODONTICALLY TREATED TEETH OBTURATED WITH RESILON AND GUTTA-PERCHA

2014 ◽  
Vol 04 (03) ◽  
pp. 075-079
Author(s):  
Kiran Halkai ◽  
Rahul Halkai ◽  
Mithra N. Hegde ◽  
Vijay Kumar ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Resistance ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Endodontically Treated Teeth ◽  
Group 4 ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Ah Plus ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2

Abstract Aim: To compare and evaluate in-vitro the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth obturated with resilon & epiphany sealer and guttapercha using different sealers. Epoxy resin based sealer AH-plus and zinc oxide eugenol based sealer-TubliSeal (EWT). Methodology: sixty four human single rooted maxillary anterior teeth, cleaned stored in 0.9% saline. All the teeth were decoronated to root length 14mm and bucco-lingual diameter of 5-7mm, After access openings teeth were instrumented using K3.06 up to final apical size 30/.06 and randomly allocated into 4 experimental groups (n=16 per group). Group 1(Control group): teeth were instrumented but not obturated, Group 2: Resilon cones and epiphany SE-sealer. Group 3: guttapercha cones and epoxy based sealer AH plus. Group 4: guttapercha and Tubli seal EWT. Coronal seal was done using IRM cement. Each of the specimens were tested for fracture resistance by instron universal testing machine. Results: Higher fracture resistance values were observed for group 2 (Resilon & Epiphany SE sealer) followed by group 3(Guttapercha & AH Plus sealer) and group 4(Guttapercha & TubliSeal EWT) when compared to group1 (control-instrumented but not obturated). Conclusion: filling the root canals with contemporary polymer based root canal obturating system- Resilon increased the in vitro fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth.

Microbial Leakage of Cavit, IRM, and Temp Bond in Post-prepared Root Canals Using Two Methods of Gutta-percha Removal: An In Vitro Study

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 53-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanan Balto ◽  
Saad Al-Nazhan ◽  
Khulood Al-Mansour ◽  
Moneera Al-Otaibi ◽  
Yunus Siddiqu
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Bacterial Suspension ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Endodontically Treated Teeth ◽  
Root Canals ◽  
Gutta Percha ◽  
Working Length ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Space

Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the integrity of the coronal seal of Temp-Bond and compare it to Cavit and IRM after post space preparation using S. faecalis as a microbial tracer. In addition, the affect of two methods of gutta percha removal on the apical seal of root canal fillings was also evaluated. Forty extracted human single rooted teeth were prepared chemomechanically and obturated with gutta percha and AH26 sealer cement using the lateral cold condensation technique to a standardized working length of 15 mm. About 10 mm of the coronal gutta-percha was removed with either Peeso-reamer or a hot plugger. The roots were divided into three experimental groups of 10 roots and a control group. Each experimental group was subdivided equally into two groups of 15 each according to the method of post space preparation. Cavit, IRM, and Temp-Bond were used to seal the access opening. Each root was fixed in a cuvette containing Tryptic Soya Broth which, covered 2 mm of the root apex. Bacterial suspension was introduced through pipette. Fresh bacterial suspension was added every week, and the system was monitored daily for the growth of microorganisms for a period of one month. The results showed there was no significant difference in terms of coronal leakage between the three coronal materials used (P=0.478), but the methods of gutta-percha removal did have an impact on the apical leakage (P=0.047). The mean value showed the Peeso-reamer provided less leakage compared to using a hot plugger during the 30-day experimental time period. It was concluded the temporary type of coronal seal of endodontically treated teeth will not prevent coronal leakage if left for a long period of time. In addition, permanent cementation of the post with the coronal restoration should be carried out as soon as possible to prevent recontamination of the root canal. Citation Balto H, Al-Nazhan S, Al-Mansour K, Al-Otaibi M, Siddiqu Y. Microbial Leakage of Cavit, IRM, and Temp Bond in Post-prepared Root Canals Using Two Methods of Gutta-percha Removal: An In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2005 August;(6)3:053-061.

scholarly journals An Evaluation of GuttaFlow2 in Filling Artificial Internal Resorption Cavities: An in vitro Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 445-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Y Hajeer ◽  
Yara Mohammad ◽  
Hisham Alafif ◽  
Oula Yassin
Keyword(s):  
Cross Sections ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Free Flow ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Injection Technique ◽  
Filling Material ◽  
The Third ◽  
Gutta Percha

ABSTRACT Introduction Obturation of root canal with internal resorption represents a major challenge in Endodontics. In spite of that, usual obturation techniques are often employed without considering the best technique to solve this problem. The goal of this study was to investigate the ability of GuttaFlow2 in filling artificial internal resorption cavities. Materials and methods The study sample included 36 human upper central incisors that were prepared using Protaper system (F4). Internal resorption cavities were prepared by cutting each tooth at 7 mm from the apex and preparing hemispherical cavities on both the sides and then re-attaching them. The sample was randomly separated into three groups (n = 12 in each group). In the first group, thermal injection technique (Obtura II) was employed and served as the control group. In the second group, injection of cold free-flow obturation technique with a master cone (GF2-C) was employed, whereas in the third group injection of cold free-flow obturation without a master cone (GF2) was followed. The teeth were re-cut at the same level as before and examined under a stereomicroscope. Subsequently, the captured images were transferred to AutoCAD program to measure the percentage of total filling “TF,” gutta-percha “G,” sealer “S,” and voids “V” out of the total surface of the cross sections. Results All materials showed high filling properties in terms of “total filling,” ranging from 99.17% (for Obtura II) to 99.72% (for GF2-C). Regarding gutta-percha percentages of filling, they ranged from 83.15 to 83.93%, whereas those for the sealer ranged from 5.71 to 15.24%. GuttaFlow2 group with a master cone appeared to give the best results despite the insignificant differences among the three groups. Conclusion The GuttaFlow2 with a master cone technique seemed to be a promising filling material and gave results similar to those observed with Obtura II. It is recommended for use to obturate internal resorption cavities in clinical practice due to its good adaptability to root canal walls, ease of handling, and application. Clinical significance Internal resorption defects can be successfully filled with GuttaFlow2 material when supplemented with a master cone, and the results are comparable with those obtained with the Obtura II technique. How to cite this article Mohammad Y, Alafif H, Hajeer MY, Yassin O. An Evaluation of GuttaFlow2 in Filling Artificial Internal Resorption Cavities: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(6):445-450.

scholarly journals Influence of Exposing Root Canal Dentin to Calcium Hydroxide on Its Flexural Strength

2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 143
Author(s):  
Diatri Nari Ratih
Keyword(s):  
Flexural Strength ◽  
Calcium Hydroxide ◽  
Root Canal ◽  
Artificial Saliva ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Sterile Saline ◽  
Root Canal Dentin

Calcium hydroxide has been used extensively in endodontic treatments, for instance as an intra-canal dressing; however, the exposure of root canal dentin to calcium hydroxide may affect its flexural strength and could have important clinical implications for endodontic treatment. The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the influence of calcium hydroxide on the flexural strength of root canal dentin.Seventy-two extracted single-rooted human mandibular premolars were used in this study. Each tooth was instrumented using crown-down technique and was irrigated using sterile saline. The teeth were assigned into three groups of 24 each. The prepared root canal system of each tooth was filled with calcium hydroxide mixed with sterile saline (group 1), a calcium hydroxide commercially available product (UltraCal®) (group 2) or saline solution (group 3, as control). The apices and access opening were sealed using composite resin, and the teeth were immersed in artificial saliva. After 7, 14 and 30 days of immersion, the inner root canal dentin of 8 teeth respectively from each group were sectioned to create dentin bars (1 X 1 mm, with 7 mm in length). Each dentin bar then was subjected to a three-point bending flexural test using MTS (Universal Testing Machine). Data gathered were then analyzed using two-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s test with the level of significance of 95%. The results showed that exposure to calcium hydroxide either using calcium hydroxide mixed with sterile saline or UltraCal® for 14 and 30 days can reduce flexural strength of root canal dentin compared to control group (p<0.05). In contrast, after 7 days exposure, there was no significantly different of flexural strength between three groups (p>0.05).   It can be concluded that calcium hydroxide reduced the flexural strength of root canal dentin. The longer the exposure to calcium hydroxide would produce a greater effect on flexural strength of root canal dentin.   

scholarly journals Impacts of contracted endodontic cavities compared to traditional endodontic cavities in premolars

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xia Juan ◽  
Wang weidong ◽  
Li Zhengmao ◽  
Lin Bingpeng ◽  
Zhang Qian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Fracture Resistance ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Filling Material ◽  
Root Canal Filling ◽  
Surface Areas ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Post Hoc

Abstract Background: This study aims to compare the percentage of dentin removed, instrumentation efficacy, root canal filling and load at fracture between contracted endodontic cavities, and traditional endodontic cavities on root canal therapy in premolars. Methods: Forty extracted intact human first premolars were imaged with micro-CT and randomly assigned to the contracted endodontic cavity (CEC) or traditional endodontic cavity (TEC) groups. CEC was prepared with the aid of a 3D-printed template, canals were prepared with a 0.04 taper M-Two rotary instrument, and cavities were restored with resin. Specimens were loaded to fracture in an Instron Universal Testing Machine after a fatigue phase. The data were analyzed by the independent samples T test and Mann-Whitney U test, appropriate post hoc tests. Results: In the premolars tested in vitro, the percentage of dentin removed in the premolars with two dental roots in the CEC group (3.85% ± 0.42%) was significantly smaller (P < 0.05) than in the TEC group (4.94% ± 0.5%). The untouched canal wall (UCW) after instrumentation for TECs (16.43% ± 6.56%) was significantly lower (P< .05) than the UCW (24.42% ± 9.19%) for CECs in single-rooted premolars. No significant differences were observed in the increased canal volume and surface areas in premolars between the TEC and CEC groups (P > 0.05). CECs conserved coronal dentin in premolars with two dental roots but no impact on the instrument efficacy. There were no differences between the CEC groups and the TEC groups in the percentage of filling material and voids (P > 0.05). In addition, the mean load at failure of premolars did not significantly differ between the CEC and TEC groups and there was no significant difference in the type of fracture (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that CEC could not improve the fracture resistance of the endodontically treated premolars. The instrumentation efficacy and the percentage of filling material did not significantly differ between CECs and TECs in premolars. Keywords: 3D-printed template, contracted endodontic cavities, instrumentation efficacy, root canal filling, fracture resistance

scholarly journals Impacts of contracted endodontic cavities compared to traditional endodontic cavities in premolars

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Xia ◽  
Weidong Wang ◽  
Zhengmao Li ◽  
Bingpeng Lin ◽  
Qian Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Root Canal ◽  
Testing Machine ◽  
Filling Material ◽  
Root Canal Filling ◽  
Surface Areas ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
3D Printed ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Rotary Instrument

Abstract Background This study aims to compare the percentage of dentin removed, instrumentation efficacy, root canal filling and load at fracture between contracted endodontic cavities, and traditional endodontic cavities on root canal therapy in premolars. Methods Forty extracted intact human first premolars were imaged with micro-CT and randomly assigned to the contracted endodontic cavity (CEC) or traditional endodontic cavity (TEC) groups. CEC was prepared with the aid of a 3D-printed template, canals were prepared with a 0.04 taper M-Two rotary instrument, and cavities were restored with resin. Specimens were loaded to fracture in an Instron Universal Testing Machine after a fatigue phase. The data were analyzed by the independent samples T test and Mann-Whitney U test, appropriate post hoc tests. Results In the premolars tested in vitro, the percentage of dentin removed in the premolars with two dental roots in the CEC group (3.85% ± 0.42%) was significantly smaller (P < 0.05) than in the TEC group (4.94% ± 0.5%). The untouched canal wall (UCW) after instrumentation for TECs (16.43% ± 6.56%) was significantly lower (P < .05) than the UCW (24.42% ± 9.19%) for CECs in single-rooted premolars. No significant differences were observed in the increased canal volume and surface areas in premolars between the TEC and CEC groups (P > 0.05). CECs conserved coronal dentin in premolars with two dental roots but no impact on the instrument efficacy. There were no differences between the CEC groups and the TEC groups in the percentage of filling material and voids (P > 0.05). In addition, the mean load at failure of premolars did not significantly differ between the CEC and TEC groups and there was no significant difference in the type of fracture (P > 0.05). Conclusion The results of this study suggest that CEC could not improve the fracture resistance of the endodontically treated premolars. The instrumentation efficacy and the percentage of filling material did not significantly differ between CECs and TECs in premolars.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document