Comparative study of adhesiveness of two endodontic root canal sealers

Abstract

O tratamento endodôntico é um procedimento clinico com o objectivo de preservar as peças dentárias, favorecer um desbridamento mecânico e químico de todo o espaço pulpar e promover a sua correcta obturação e selamento. De forma a obter o mesmo, os cimentos endodônticos sao usados conjuntamente com um material de core inerte. Assim sendo, é necessário avaliar vários parâmetros que fazem destes cimentos um fator adjuvante à terapia endodôntica. O presente estudo teve como objectivo avaliar a adesividade dos cimentos AH Plus ® e GuttaFlow Bioseal, tanto às paredes dos canais como ao material de core.Foram reunidos 30 dentes para amostra. As coroas foram seccionadas e o comprimento de trabalho ajustado a 14mm com limas ProTaper® Universal. Foram divididos 2 grupos experimentais: 1, com especimens obturados com AH Plus ® eo 2 com dentes obturados com GuttaFlow Bioseal. Ambos os grupos passaram pela mesma técnica de preparação canalar (técnica de cone único). AS amostras foram seccionadas em três cortes (apical, médio e cervical), incluídas em Tab 2000®, sumetidas ao teste push-out e posteriormente fotografadas com um microscópio acoplado de uma câmara digital e tratadas com software ACT-1C. Verificaram-se diferenças estatisticamente significantes entre o AH Plus ® e GuttaFlow Bioseal no que toca à presença de fraturas. AH Plus ® demonstrou ser mais eficaz neste parâmentro, produzindo uma percentagem de fraturas de 64,6% (n=29) comparativamente ao GuttaFlow Bioseal, que apresentou uma percentagem de 84,4%. (n=38)

Introduction: The endodontic treatment is a clinic procedure with the gold to preserve the dental pieces, aiming a mechanical and chemical debridement of the hole pulpar space and its correct obturation and sealing. In order to have a hermetic seal, endodontic cements are used together with an inert core material to achieve this same effect. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the different parameters that make these cements being an adjuvant factor to the success of the endodontic therapy. The following experimental project has the goal to access and compare the bonding adhesion (to the root canal walls as to the core material) of two endodontic cements: AH Plus ® and GuttaFlow Bioseal®. Materials and methods: To conduct this study, there were collected 30 human teeth for the sample. The crowns of these teeth were sectioned, and they were mechanically adjusted to 14 mm of working length with ProTaper® Universal files. There was a division into two experimental groups for analyses: in experimental group 1 (GAH Plus®), the teeth were obturated with AH Plus®, using the single cone technique; and in experimental group 2 (GBioseal®), the teeth were filled with GuttaFlow Bioseal®, using also the single cone technique. The samples were included in Tab 2000®, submitted to the push-out tes, and then photographed with a microscope with a camera incorporated, and the scanned by ACT-1C program. The images were scanned after the push-out test and observed through the microscope. Results: There are statistically significant differences between AH Plus® and GuttaFlow Bioseal® in the presence and material fracture observed. Conclusion: AH Plus® represented a better sealing, with a percentage for failure of 64,4% of the cases (n=29) and the sealer GuttaFlow Bioseal® in 84,4% of the cases (n=38).