Efficacy of various activation techniques on tubule penetration of resin-based and bioceramic root canal sealers: An in vitro confocal microscopy study
Sibel Koçak DDS, PhD
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Olcay Özdemir DDS, PhD
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Karabük University, Karabük, Turkey
Correspondence
Olcay Özdemir, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, Karabük University, Karabük, Turkey.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorMustafa Murat Koçak DDS, PhD
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey
Search for more papers by this authorBaran Can Sağlam DDS, PhD
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey
Search for more papers by this authorSibel Koçak DDS, PhD
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Olcay Özdemir DDS, PhD
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Karabük University, Karabük, Turkey
Correspondence
Olcay Özdemir, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, Karabük University, Karabük, Turkey.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorMustafa Murat Koçak DDS, PhD
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey
Search for more papers by this authorBaran Can Sağlam DDS, PhD
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University, Zonguldak, Turkey
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
To compare the penetration of Ah Plus and MTA Fillapex after irrigation activation with sonic, passive ultrasonic, SWEEPS and XP-Endo Finisher using confocal microscopy. Instrumented root canals of 160 mandibular premolar teeth were allocated randomly to four groups (n = 40/group) and eight subgroups according to the activation techniques and canal sealers (n = 20/subgroup). After the obturation, three sections at 1–2, 5–6 and 9–10 mm levels from the apex were examined. Penetration area and maximum penetration depth values were represented as mean and standard deviation, and results below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. For penetration area and maximum penetration depth, the statistical difference was found in terms of material, device and region (Maximum penetration depth: p = 0.006, p < 0.001, p < 0.001; Penetration area: p = 0.004, p < 0.001, p < 0.001). SWEEPS was found to be relatively higher than other groups. Sealers presented similar results when evaluated independently of the region. The use of SWEEPS for irrigation activation is promising in terms of tubule penetration.
REFERENCES
- 1Brito PR, Souza LC, de Oliveira JCM, Alves FR, De-Deus G, Lopes HP, et al. Comparison of the effectiveness of three irrigation techniques in reducing intracanal Enterococcus faecalis populations: an in vitro study. J Endod. 2009; 35(10): 1422–7.
- 2Ram Z. Effectiveness of root canal irrigation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1977; 44(2): 306–12.
- 3Khedmat S, Shokouhinejad N. Comparison of the efficacy of three chelating agents in smear layer removal. J Endod. 2008; 34(5): 599–602.
- 4De Moor RJ, Meire M, Goharkhay K, Moritz A, Vanobbergen J. Efficacy of ultrasonic versus laser-activated irrigation to remove artificially placed dentin debris plugs. J Endod. 2010; 36(9): 1580–3.
- 5Lukac N, Muc BT, Jezersek M, Lukac M. Photoacoustic endodontics using the novel SWEEPS Er: YAG laser modality. J Laser Health Acad. 2017; 1: 1–7.
- 6Ivanusic T, Lukac M, Lukac N, Jezersek M. SSP/SWEEPS endodontics with the SkyPulse Er: YAG dental laser. J Laser Health Acad. 2019; 1: 1–10.
- 7Ørstavik D, Eriksen H, Beyer-Olsen EM. Adhesive properties and leakage of root canal sealers in vitro. Int Endod J. 1983; 16(2): 59–63.
- 8Marciano MA, Guimarães BM, Ordinola-Zapata R, Bramante CM, Cavenago BC, Garcia RB, et al. Physical properties and interfacial adaptation of three epoxy resin–based sealers. J Endod. 2011; 37(10): 1417–21.
- 9Al-Haddad A, Kutty MG, Abu Kasim NH, Che Ab Aziz ZA. The effect of moisture conditions on the constitution of two bioceramic-based root canal sealers. J Dent Sci. 2017; 12(4): 340–6.
- 10Gharib SR, Tordik PA, Imamura GM, Baginski TA, Goodell GG. A confocal laser scanning microscope investigation of the epiphany obturation system. J Endod. 2007; 33(8): 957–61.
- 11Eymirli A, Sungur DD, Uyanik O, Purali N, Nagas E, Cehreli ZC. Dentinal tubule penetration and retreatability of a calcium silicate–based sealer tested in bulk or with different main core material. J Endod. 2019; 45(8): 1036–40.
- 12Bolles JA, He J, Svoboda KK, Schneiderman E, Glickman GNJ. Comparison of vibringe, endoactivator, and needle irrigation on sealer penetration in extracted human teeth. J Endod. 2013; 39(5): 708–11.
- 13Özdemir O, Koçak S, Hazar E, Sağlam BC, Coşkun E, Koçak MM. Dentinal tubule penetration of gutta-percha with syringe-mix resin sealer using different obturation techniques: a confocal laser scanning microscopy study. Aust Endod J. 2022; 48(2): 258–65.
- 14Shokouhinejad N, Sabeti M, Gorjestani H, Saghiri MA, Lotfi M, Hoseini AJ. Penetration of epiphany, epiphany self-etch, and AH plus into dentinal tubules: a scanning electron microscopy study. J Endod. 2011; 37(9): 1316–9.
- 15De Deus GA, Gurgel-Filho ED, Maniglia-Ferreira C, Coulinho-Filho TJ. The influence of filling technique on depth of tubule penetration by root canal sealer: a study using light microscopy and digital image processing. Aust End J. 2004; 30(1): 23–8.
- 16Tuncer AK, Ünal BJ. Comparison of sealer penetration using the EndoVac irrigation system and conventional needle root canal irrigation. J Endod. 2014; 40(5): 613–7.
- 17Gu LS, Kim JR, Ling J, Choi KK, Pashley DH, Tay FRJ. Review of contemporary irrigant agitation techniques and devices. J Endod. 2009; 35(6): 791–804.
- 18Leoni G, Versiani M, Silva-Sousa Y, Bruniera J, Pécora J, Sousa-Neto MJ. Ex vivo evaluation of four final irrigation protocols on the removal of hard-tissue debris from the mesial root canal system of mandibular first molars. Int Endod J. 2017; 50(4): 398–406.
- 19Azim AA, Aksel H, Zhuang T, Mashtare T, Babu JP, Huang GT. Efficacy of 4 irrigation protocols in killing bacteria colonized in dentinal tubules examined by a novel confocal laser scanning microscope analysis. J Endod. 2016; 42(6): 928–34.
- 20Zhu X, Yin X, Chang JW, Wang Y, Cheung GS, Zhang C. Comparison of the antibacterial effect and smear layer removal using photon-initiated photoacoustic streaming aided irrigation versus a conventional irrigation in single-rooted canals: an in vitro study. Photomed Laser Surg. 2013; 31(8): 371–7.
- 21Turkel E, Onay EO, Ungor M. Comparison of three final irrigation activation techniques: effects on canal cleanness, smear layer removal, and dentinal tubule penetration of two root canal sealers. Photomed Laser Surg. 2017; 35(12): 672–81.
- 22Yang Q, Liu M, Zhu L, Peng BJ. Micro-CT study on the removal of accumulated hard-tissue debris from the root canal system of mandibular molars when using a novel laser-activated irrigation approach. Int Endod J. 2020; 53(4): 529–38.
- 23Su Z, Li Z, Shen Y, Bai Y, Zheng Y, Pan C, et al. Characteristics of the irrigant flow in a simulated lateral canal under two typical laser-activated irrigation regimens. Lasers Surg Med. 2021; 53(4): 587–94.
- 24Kosarieh E, Bolhari B, Pirayvatlou SS, Kharazifard MJ, Sattari Khavas S, Jafarnia S, et al. Effect of Er: YAG laser irradiation using SWEEPS and PIPS technique on dye penetration depth after root canal preparation. Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther. 2021; 33:102136.
- 25Elnaghy AM, Mandorah A, Elsaka SE. Effectiveness of XP-endo finisher, EndoActivator, and file agitation on debris and smear layer removal in curved root canals: a comparative study. Odontology. 2017; 105(2): 178–83.
- 26De-Deus G, Belladonna FG, de Siqueira Zuolo A, Perez R, Carvalho MS, Souza EM, et al. Micro-CT comparison of XP-endo finisher and passive ultrasonic irrigation as final irrigation protocols on the removal of accumulated hard-tissue debris from oval shaped-canals. Clin Oral Investig. 2019; 23(7): 3087–93.
- 27Hamdan R, Michetti J, Pinchon D, Diemer F, Georgelin-Gurgel M. The XP-Endo finisher for the removal of calcium hydroxide paste from root canals and from the apical third. J Clin Exp Dent. 2017; 9(7): e855–60.
- 28D'Costa VF, Rodrigues AL, Bangera MK, Bhat PA, Rai RU. A confocal microscopic study on percentage penetration of different sealers into dentin. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2021; 13(1): 725–30.
- 29Mamootil K, Messer H. Penetration of dentinal tubules by endodontic sealer cements in extracted teeth and in vivo. Int Endod J. 2007; 40(11): 873–81.
- 30Bernardes RA, de Amorim Campelo A, Junior DS, Pereira LO, Duarte MA, Moraes IG, et al. Evaluation of the flow rate of 3 endodontic sealers: sealer 26, AH plus, and MTA Obtura. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010; 109(1): e47–9.
- 31Patel D, Sherriff M, Ford T, Watson T, Mannocci F. The penetration of RealSeal primer and Tubliseal into root canal dentinal tubules: a confocal microscopic study. Int Endod J. 2007; 40(1): 67–71.
- 32Tuncer AK, Tuncer S, Gökyay SS. Correlation between sealer penetration into dentinal tubules and bond strength of two new calcium silicate-based and an epoxy resin-based, endodontic sealer. J Adhes Sci Technol. 2014; 28(7): 702–10.
- 33Amoroso-Silva PA, Guimarães BM, Marciano MA, Duarte MA, Cavenago BC, Ordinola-Zapata R, et al. Microscopic analysis of the quality of obturation and physical properties of MTA Fillapex. Microsc Res Tech. 2014; 77(12): 1031–6.