• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.543-549
• /
• 2000

Gutta-percha와 근관sealer를 사용한 근관 충전은 가장 많이 이용되고 성공률이 높은 방법이지만, 현재 사용되는 모든 근관sealer는 미세누출을 나타낸다. 따라서 더 효과적인 근관 폐쇄를 이루기 위한 재료 및 방법들이 연구되어왔다. 이중 상아질 접착제는 근관 충전재와 함께 사용되어 미세누출을 감소시키지만, 근관 내에 사용하기에 술식이 복잡하고 기술이 요구된다. 본 연구의 목적은 gutta-percha와 레진계 근관 sealer로 충전한 근관에서 self-etching primer를 미리 도포한 경우와 도포하지 않은 경우의 치근단 미세누출을 비교하고, self-etching primer를 도포함에 있어 근관 내에 적용하는 방법에 따른 미세누출을 비교하는 것이다. 또한 근관sealer와 상아질 계면을 주사전자현미경으로 관찰하여, 이 결과를 미세누출과 관련시켜보고자 하였다. 36개의 발거된 사람의 단근치에서 치관부를 절단, 제거하고 ProFile로 근관 형성한 후, 무작위로 선택하여 4개의 군으로 분류하였다. 1군에서는 주사기와 30게이지 주사 바늘로 self-etching primer를 근관 내에 적용하였고, 2군에서는 self-etching primer를 paper point에 적셔 근관 내에 적용하였다. 3군에서는 self-etching primer를 적용하지 않았다. 1, 2, 3군의 치아를 gutta-percha와 AH26 sealer를 사용하여 continuous wave 충전법으로 충전한 후 치근단공 주위 3mm를 제외한 치근변에 nail polish를 2회 도포하였고, 4군(음성 대조군)은 치근면 전체에 도포하였다. 1군과 2군에서 각각 2개의 치아는 주사전자현미경적 관찰을 위해 준비하였다. 모든 치아를 Methylene Blue 수용액에 48시간동안 침적, 수세한 후 치아 장축에 평행하게 양분하여 10배의 실물확대현미경 하에서 치근단 색소 침투를 관찰하였다. Self-etching primer를 도포한 군과 도포하지 않은 군 사이에는 평균 미세누출량에 유의한 차이가 없었다. 주사 바늘로 적용한 군과 paper point로 적용한 군 사이에도 평균 미세누출량에 유의한 차이가 없었다. 상아질과 근관 sealer계면의 주사전자현미경 관찰 결과 일부분에서 긴밀한 접착 관계를 나타내었고, 다른 부분에서는 간극을 나타내었다.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.385-396
• /
• 2011

Objectives: This study evaluated the effects of adhesion variables such as the priming concepts of canal wall and the curing modes of adhesives on the sealing ability of a resin-based root canal filling system. Materials and Methods: Apical microleakage of the Resilon-RealSeal systems filled with 3 different combinations of adhesion variables was compared with the conventional gutta-percha filling using a dye penetration method. Experimental groups were SEDC, Resilon (Resilon Research LLC) filling with self-etch RealSeal (SybronEndo) primer and dual-cure RealSeal sealer; NELC, Resilon filling with no etching, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (3M ESPE) primer application and light-curing adhesive; and TELC, Resilon filling with Scotchbond Multi-Purpose primer and adhesive used under total etch / wet bonding and lightcure protocols. GPCS, gutta-percha filling with conventional AH26 plus sealer, was the control group. Results: The median longitudinal dye penetration length of TELC was significantly shorter than those of GPCS and SEDC (Kruskal-Wallis test, p < 0.05). In the cross-sectional microleakage scores, TELC showed significant differences from other groups at 2 to 5 mm from the apical foramen (Kruskal-Wallis test, p < 0.05). Conclusions: When a resin-based root canal filling material was used, compared to the self-etching primer and the dual-cure sealer, the total etch/wet-bonding with primer and light-curing of adhesive showed improved apical sealing and was highly recommended.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.51-57
• /
• 2004

본 연구는 에폭시레진계 봉함제 (AH26)과 두 가지의 상아질 접착제와 함께 근관충전을 시 행하였을 때와 에폭시레진계 봉함제 단독으로 사용하였을 때의 미세누출을 혐기성 세균모델을 이용하여 평가하였다. 52개의 단근치를 이용하여 .04, .06 taper Profile (Dentsply-Maillefer, Ballaigues, Swiss)을 사용하여 변형된 crown-down pressureless법으로 근관형성 하였다. 형성된 치근을 12개씩 무작위로 나누어 4개의 실험군으로 하였으며, 나머지 치아 중 2개를 양성대조군에, 2개는 음성대조군으로 사용하였다. 제1군은 All Bond 2(Bisco, Itasca, IL, USA)를 적용하고 거타퍼쳐와 AH26 (Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany)을 이용하여 continuous wave of condensation technique으로 근관충전 하였으며, 제 2군은Prime ＆ Bond NT (Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany)를 적용 후 거타퍼쳐와 AH26을 이용하여 충전하였으며, 제3군은 17％ EDTA를 적용하여 도말층을 제거한 후 거터퍼쳐 와 AH26을 사용하여 충전하였다. 제4군은 17％ EDTA를 적용하지 않고 거터퍼쳐와 AH26을 사용하여 충전하였다. Fusobacterium nucleatum (VPI 10197)을 추적자로 이용한 혐기성세균모델을 사용하여 혐기성배양기에서 배양시키면서 60일 동안 각군에 대한 미세누출 여부를 관찰하였다. 매일 배양액의 혼탁도와 색상변화를 관찰하여 기록하였다. 제4군에서 통계학적으로 유의할만한 미세누출을 가장 많이 보였으며(p<0.0005) 나머지 3개의 실험군에서는 서로간의 통계학적으로 유의할 만한 차이를 보이지 않았다. 주사전자현미경 관찰 시 제 1군과 제2군의 상아질 접착제가 상아세관으로 침투한 소견을 관찰 할 수 있었다.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.32 no.5
• /
• pp.419-425
• /
• 2007

The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiopacity and cytotoxicity of three resin-based (AH 26, EZ fill and AD Seal), a zinc oxide-eugenol-based (ZOB Seal), and a calcium hydroxide-based (Sealapex) root canal sealers. Specimens, 10 mm in diameter and 1 mm in thickness, were radiographed simultaneously with an aluminum step wedge using occlusal films, according to ISO 6876/2001 standards. Radiographs were digitized, and the radiopacity of sealers was compared to the different thicknesses of the aluminum step wedge, using the Scion image software. Using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, the cytotoxicity of each material was determined in immortalized human periodontal ligament (IPDL) cells. The results demonstrated that EZ fill was the most radiopaque sealer, while Sealapex was the least radiopaque (p < 0.05). AH 26, AD Seal and ZOB Seal presented intermediate radiopacity values. All the materials evaluated, except for Sealapex, presented the minimum radiopacity required by ISO standards. The cell viabilities of resin-based root canal sealers were statistically higher than that of other type of root canal sealers through the all experimental time. Further, EZ fill showed statistically lower cell viability in 24 and 48 hours compared to AD Seal and in 72 hours compared to all other resin-based root canal sealers. However, there was no correlation between the radiopacity and cytotoxicity of three resin-based root canals sealers (p > 0.05). These results indicate that resin-based root canal sealer is more biocompatible and has advantage in terms of radiopacity.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.80-87
• /
• 2017

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the physical properties of a novel resin-based endodontic sealer, Any-Seal, in comparison with AH Plus Jet. Materials and Methods: Flow, radiopacity and compressive strength were examined according to ISO 6876/2001. For flow test, 0.05 mL of sealer was placed between glass plate and 100 g weight were applied. Ten minutes after mixing the sealers, the load was removed and the diameters of the compressed sealer discs were measured. For radiopacity, 10 mm diameter and 1 mm thickness sample were fabricated and took radiograph with an aluminum step-wedge and analyzed using imaging program. For compressive strength test, $4mm{\times}6mm$ cylindrical specimen was fabricated and tested after 24 hours and 1 week using Universal testing machine. Results: Both tested sealers were consistent with ISO 6876/2001 in the flow and radiopacity test. The flow values of both sealers were not significantly different (P > 0.05). AH Plus Jet had significantly higher radiopacity (P < 0.05). AH Plus Jet showed higher compressive strength at both time intervals (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Any-Seal showed low compressive strength until after 1 week, so its physical and biological aspect should be evaluated more before clinical use.

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.43 no.2
• /
• pp.129-136
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study is to examine the sealing effect and efficiency of root canal filling MTA (Endoseal, Endoseal MTA). A total of 106 extracted single rooted teeth were used and classified with group AH (AH-26), group PR (ProRoot MTA), group ES (Endoseal) and group EM (Endoseal MTA) depending on filled sealers. Time was measured in each group when sealers were filled. The groups were divided into subgroup A and subgroup B. The sealing of root canal walls and penetration of sealer in the dentinal tubule were evaluated, respectively. According to the results, the sealing of root canal walls and dentinal tubule penetration of root canal filling MTA were inferior to AH-26 (p < 0.05). When compared with ProRoot MTA, however, there was no significant difference in sealing of root canal walls (p > 0.05), but dentinal tubule penetration was high (p < 0.05). Working time was shorter in root canal filling MTA than ProRoot MTA and AH-26 (p < 0.05). In conclusion, root canal filling MTA has lower root canal sealing effect than resin-based sealer, however, when in MTA needed root canal filling, it could be an effective alternative.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.36-49
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study was to compare the cytotoxicity by MTT test and genotoxicity by Ames test of new calcium phosphate-based root canal sealers (CAPSEAL I, CAPSEAL II) with commercially available resin-based sealers (AH 26, AH Plus) , zinc oxide eugenol-based sealers (Tubliseal EWT, Pulp Canal Sealer EWT), calcium hydroxide-based sealer (Sealapex), and tricalcium phosphate based sealers (Sankin Apatite Root Canal Sealer I, II, III). According to this study, the results were as follows : 1. The extracts of freshly mixed group showed higher toxicity than those of 24 h set group in MTT assay (p<0.001). 2. CAPSEAL I and CAPSEAL II were less cytotoxic than AH 26, AH Plus, Tubliseal EWT, Pulp Canal Sealer EWT Sealapex and SARCS II in freshly mixed group (p<0.01). 3. AH 26 in freshly mixed group showed mutagenicity to TA98 and TA100 with and without S9 mix and AH Plus extracts also were mutagenic to TA100 with and without S9 mix. 4. Tubliseal EWT, Pulp Canal Sealer EWT and Sealapex in freshly mixed group were mutagenic to TA100 with S9 mix. 5. Among those of 24 h set groups the extracts of SARCS II were mutagenic to TA98 with and without S9 mix and AH 26 showed mutagenic effects to TA98 with S9 mix. 6. No mutagenic effect of CAPSEAL I and CAPSEAL II was detected. 7. There is no statistically significant difference between CAPSEAL I and CAPSEAL II at MTT assay and Ames test in both freshly mixed group and 24 h set group.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.56 no.5
• /
• pp.254-262
• /
• 2018

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the postoperative pain and clinical performance after applying three different intracanal medicaments and root canal sealers. Materials and Methods: Sixty-five patients requiring root canal treatment due to symptomatic apical periodontitis were included in this study. After a glide path preparation by using PathFile, each canal was shaped with ProTaper Next file system. After the canal cleaning and shaping procedure, the canal was dried and each intracanal medicaments were adjusted (Calcipex II, TRC-paste, Metapaste). At the next visit, the patients were requested to answer the absence of the pain after the procedure. Once the patients showed no symptom, the canal was obturated with each corresponded root canal sealers (AH plus, Radic-sealer, ADseal). The patients were recalled after 1 week, 1, 3, and 6 months to check the postoperative pain or unexpected clinical signs. One-way ANOVA and Duncan's post hoc comparison, and Chi-square test were used for statistical analysis to evaluate any differences among tested materials. Results: The average number of visits for intracanal medication was 2.69, 2.65, and 2.61 for Calcipex II, TRC-paste, and Metapaste. There were no statistically differences in post-obturation pain among three groups obturated with different root canal sealers (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Under the limitations of this study, three tested intracanal medicaments and epoxy resin root canal sealers showed clinically acceptable similar results.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.323-329
• /
• 2006

The aim of this study was to evaluate the retrievability of Resilon as a root canal filling material Twenty-seven human single-rooted extracted teeth were instrumented utilizing a crown down technique with Gates-Glidden burs and ProFile system. In group1 (n = 12) canals were obturated with gutta percha and AH-26 plus sealer using a continuous wave technique and backfilled. In group 2 (n = 15) Resilon was used as a filling material. Then teeth were sealed and kept in $37^{\circ}C$ and 100% humidity for 7 days. For retreatment, the samples were re-accessed and filling material was removed using Gates-Glidden burs and ProFiles. Teeth were sectioned longitudinally to compare the general cleanliness and amount of debris $({\times}\;75)$ using SEM. Chi-square test was used $({\alpha}\;=\;0.05)$ to analyze the data. The total time required for removal of filling materials was expressed as mean ${\pm}SD$ (min) and analyzed by the Student t-test $({\alpha}\;=\;0.05)$, Required time for retreatment was $3.25\;{\pm}\;0.32$ minutes for gutta percha/ AH 26 plus sealer and $3.05\;{\pm}\;0.34$ minutes for Resilon. There was no statistically significant difference between the two experimental groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in the cleanliness of the root canal wall. This study showed that Resilon was effectively removed by Gates-Glidden burs and ProFiles.