COMPARISON OF BACTERIAL CORONAL LEAKAGE BETWEEN DIFFERENT OBTURATION MATERIALS (AN IN VITRO STUDY)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Instructor at the Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.

2 Professor of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.

3 Assistant Professor of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.

4 Professor of Microbiology, Head of Microbiology department, High Institute of Public Health, Alexandria University, Egypt.

Abstract

Introduction: Bacteria and their by-products are the main cause of pulpal and periapical diseases. That is why all routes between root canal system and peridontium should be sealed to prevent bacterial leakage. Objectives: Was to compare the coronal bacterial leakage between different obturation materials. Materials and methods: Sixty single-canaled lower premolars were used in this study. Teeth were decoronated to standardize root length to 12 mm. Instrumentation was done using Protaper universal rotary system to file size F4, then teeth were divided into six groups, four experimental and two control (n=10). Group I: obturation was done using CPoint and Endosequence bioceramic sealer using single-cone technique; Group II: obturation was done using Protaper gutta percha and Endosequence bioceramic sealer; Group III: obturation was done using Protaper gutta percha and Adseal resin sealer; Group IV: obturation was done using Protaper gutta percha and MTA Fillapex sealer; Group V: used as positive control; Group VI: used as negative control. Groups II, III, IV, VI were obturated using lateral condensation technique. A split-chamber microbial leakage model was used to detect bacterial leakage. Turbidity in the lower chamber was observed daily for 60 days. Data were analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis and Monte-Carlo test. Results: all experimental groups showed leakage throughout the study period, Group I showed the best results with a mean of (37.30 ± 23.61) days while Group II and III showed nearly equal results with a mean of (32.10 ± 22.57) and (33.10 ± 19.90) days, respectively. Group IV showed a mean of (16.90 ± 8.21) days and was found to be statistically significant than the other groups (P= 0.048). Conclusions: None of the tested materials were able to provide a complete hermetic seal. CPoint with endosequence bioceramic sealer provided the best coronal seal while MTA Fillapex was the worst. CPoint obturation system can be an alternative to lateral condensation technique. 

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Schäfer E, Olthoff G. Effect of Three Different Sealers on the Sealing Ability of Both Thermafil Obturators and Cold Laterally Compacted Gutta-Percha. J Endod. 2002;9:638-42.
2. Hess D, Solomon E, Spears R, He J. Retreatability of a Bioceramic Root Canal Sealing Material. J Endod. 2011;11:1547-9.
3. Shokouhinejad N, Gorjestani H, Nasseh A, Hoseini A, Mohammadi M, Shamshiri A. Push-out bond strength of gutta-percha with a new bioceramic sealer in the presence or absence of smear layer. Aust Endod J. 2011;3:1-6.
4. Torabinejad M, Parirokh M. Mineral Trioxide Aggregate: A Comprehensive Literature Review—Part II: Leakage and Biocompatibility Investigations. J Endod. 2010;2:190-202.
5. Sonmez I, Oba A, Sonmez D, Almaz M. In vitro evaluation of apical microleakage of a new MTA-based sealer. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2012;5:252-5.
6. Mokhtari H, Shahi S, Janani M, Reyhani M, Mokhtari Z, Rahimi S et al. Evaluation of apical leakage in root canals obturated with three different sealers in presence or absence of smear layer. Iran Endod J. 2015;2:131-4.
7. Marina A, Bruno M, Ordinola-Zapata R, Clovis M, Bruno C, Roberto B et al. Physical Properties and Interfacial Adaptation of Three Epoxy Resin–based Sealers. J Endod. 2011;10:1417-21.
8. Krishnan Hari. Water-Expandable Endodontic Obturation Point: A Review. RRJDS 2014;1:37-41.
9. Arora S, Hegde V. Comparative evaluation of a novel
smart-seal obturating system and its homogeneity of using cone beam computed tomography: In vitro simulated lateral canal study. J Conserv Dent.
2014;4:364-8.
10. Didato A, Eid A, Levin M, Khan S, Tay F, Rueggeberg
F. Time-based lateral hygroscopic expansion of a water- expandable endodontic obturation point. J Dent. 2013;9:796-801.
11. Aminsobhani M, Ghorbanzadeh A, Bolhari B, Shokouhinejad N, Ghabraei S, Assadian H et al. Coronal microleakage in root canals obturated with lateral compaction, warm vertical compaction and guttaflow system. Iran Endod J. 2010;2:83-7.
12. Eldeniz A, Orstavik D. A laboratory assessment of coronal bacterial leakage in root canals filled with new and conventional sealers. Int Endod J. 2009;4:303-12.
13. TorabinejadM,UngB,KetteringJD.Invitrobacterial penetration of coronally unsealed endodontically treated teeth. J Endod. 1990;12:566-9.
14. Barthell CR, Moshonov J, Shuping G, Orstavik D. Bacterial leakage versus dye leakage in obturated root canals. Int Endod J. 1999;32:370-5.
15. HegdeV,AroraS.Sealingabilityofanovelhydrophilic vs. conventional hydrophobic obturation systems: A bacterial leakage study. J Conserv Dent. 2015;1:62-5.
16. Silva G, Silva E, Silva J, Andrade-Junior C, Ferraz C. Sealing ability promoted by three different endodontic sealers. Iran Endod J. 2011;2:86-9.
17. Ingle JI, Bakland LK. Endodontics. 5th ed. London: BC Decker Inc; 2002.
18. Mitic A, Mitic N, Tosic G. Apical leakage of root canal system obturation materials. Serb Dent J. 2005;52:90-6.
19. Gerald M, Denver R. Antiseptics and Disinfectants: Activity, Action, and Resistance. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;1:147-79.
20. George S, Pichardo M, Bergeron B, Jeansonne B. The effect of formalin storage on the apical microleakage of obturated canals. J Endod. 2006;9:869-71.
21. Metzger Z, Abramovitz R, Abramovitz L, Tagger M. Correlation between remaining length of root canal fillings after immediate post space preparation and coronal leakage. J Endod. 2000;12:724-8.
22. Mozini A, Vansan P, Neto M, Pietro R. influence of the length of remaining root canal filling and post space preparation on the coronal leakage of Enterococcus Faecalis. Braz J Microbial. 2009;40:174-9.
23. Grandini S, Balleri P, Ferrari M. Evaluation of Glyde File Prep in Combination with Sodium Hypochlorite as a Root Canal Irrigant. J Endod. 2002;4:300-3.
24. Lim TS, Wee TY, Choi MY, Koh WC, Sae‐Lim V. Light and scanning electron microscopic evaluation of GlydeTM File Prep in smear layer removal. Int Endod J. 2003;5:336-43.
25. Kanodia S, Matta S, Parmar J. Stereomicroscopic and scanning electron microscopic evaluation of glyde file prep in smear layer removal. IJHBR. 2014;2:170-7.
26. Baumgartner JC, Mader CL. A scanning electron microscopic evaluation of four root canal irrigation regimens. J Endod. 1987;13:147-57.
27. Semra C, Ahmet S. Time-Dependent Effects of EDTA on Dentin Structures. J Endod. 2002;1:17-9.
28. LaiSC,MakYF,CheungGS.Reversalofcompromised bonding to oxidized etched dentin. J Dent Res. 2001;80:1919-24.
29. Malik G, Bogra P, Singh S, Samra R. Comparative evaluation of intracanal sealing ability of mineral trioxide aggregate and glass ionomer cement: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2013;6:540-45.
30. Shipper G, Orstavik D, Teixeira F, Trope M. An evaluation of microbial leakage in roots filled with a thermoplastic synthetic polymer-based root canal filling material (Resilon). J Endod. 2004;5:342-7.
31. Pratishta J, Manish R. The rise of biocramics in endodontics : A review. Int J Pharm Bio Sci. 2015:416- 22.
32. Hegde V, Arora S. Sealing ability of three hydrophilic single-cone obturation systems: An in vitro glucose leakage study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2015;1:86-9.
33. El-Sayed MA, Taleb AA, Balbahaith MM. An in vitro comparative analysis of glucose leakage for three contemporary single-cone obturation systems. J Res Dent. 2014;1:1-5.
34. ErsahanS,AydinC.DislocationresistanceofiRootSP, a calcium silicate-based sealer, from radicular dentine. J Endod. 2010;12:2000-2.
35. LeeW,WilliamsM,CampsJ,PashleyD.Adhesionof Endodontic Sealers to Dentin and Gutta-Percha. J Endod. 2002;10:684-8.
36. ZhangW,LiZ,PengB.Assessmentofanewrootcanal sealer's apical sealing ability. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;6:79-82.
37. Al-ZakaI,AmmarA,HikmetA,MehdiJ.Theeffectof different root canal irrigants on the sealing ability of Bioceramic sealer. MDJ. 2013;1:1-7.
38. Assmann E, Scarparo R, Böttcher D, Grecca F. Dentin bond strength of two mineral trioxide aggregate–based and one epoxy resin–based sealers. J Endod. 2012;2:219-21.
39. Borges RP, Sousa‐Neto MD, Versiani MA, Rached‐Júnior FA, De‐Deus G, Miranda C et al. Changes in the surface of four calcium silicate‐containing endodontic materials and an epoxy resin‐based sealer after a solubility test. Int Endod J. 2012;5:419-28.
40. Ferreira MM, Abrantes M, Ferreira H, Carrilho E, Botelho M. Comparison of the apical seal on filled root canals with Topseal vs MTA Fillapex sealers: A quantitative scintigraphic analysis. OPST. 2013;3:128- 32.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics