Sealing efficacy of a single-cone root filling after post space preparation

11Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to compare the sealing efficacy of root fillings made by a single-cone technique with three different sealers and a cold lateral compaction technique with an epoxy sealer. Materials and methods: Eighty extracted single-rooted human teeth were assigned to four experimental groups: group 1, single-cone and epoxy sealer; group 2, single-cone and calcium silicate-based sealer; group 3, single-cone and methacrylate resin-based sealer; and group 4, cold lateral compaction and epoxy sealer. Twenty extra teeth served as negative and positive controls. After preparation of a coronal post space, the sealing efficacy of the root fillings was assessed on a fluid transport setup. The results were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test. Results: No fluid transport was detected for the negative controls whereas all the positive controls showed rapid fluid transport. No significant difference was detected between groups 1, 3, and 4 whereas group 2 demonstrated significantly more fluid transport than all the other experimental groups. Conclusions: Root fillings made by a single-cone technique with the epoxy or methacrylate-based sealers were as effective after post space preparation as those made by a cold lateral technique with the epoxy sealer in sealing the root canal. Clinical Relevance: Specific root canal sealers in combination with single-cone technique represent a noteworthy alternative to the use of cold lateral compaction technique when a post space is required. The use of effective endodontic procedures with simplified technical implementation may positively affect endodontic outcome.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Deniz Sungur, D., Moinzadeh, A. T., Wesselink, P. R., Çalt Tarhan, S., & Özok, A. R. (2016). Sealing efficacy of a single-cone root filling after post space preparation. Clinical Oral Investigations, 20(5), 1071–1077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1593-2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free