Comparison of Intra-orifice Sealing Ability of Three Materials Placed after Endodontic Treatment: In Vitro Study
Reetubrita Bhol, Soumya Shetty, Rajesh Shetty, Riya Parwani, Piyush Oswal
Bulk fill composite, Cention N, Microleakage, Stereomicroscope, Zirconomer
Citation Information :
Bhol R, Shetty S, Shetty R, Parwani R, Oswal P. Comparison of Intra-orifice Sealing Ability of Three Materials Placed after Endodontic Treatment: In Vitro Study. World J Dent 2022; 13 (S1):S8-S13.
Aim and objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the intra-orifice sealing ability of Cention N, packable bulk fill composite, and Zirconomer as an intra-orifice barrier in endodontically treated teeth under a stereomicroscope. Materials and methods: Thirty-three single-rooted teeth were decoronated at cementoenamel junction (CEJ). Following root canal treatment, 3 mm of the coronal gutta-percha was removed and the experimental material [group I (n = 11)—packable bulk fill composite, group II (n = 11)—Zirconomer, and group III (n = 11)—Cention N] was placed as an intra-orifice barrier. A dye penetration test was performed and observed under a stereomicroscope. The extent of dye penetration was measured and statistical analysis using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and post hoc Tukey test was done. Results: The mean values of microleakage (in mm) for groups I, II, and III were 1.18, 0.81, and 0.74, respectively. Tukey–Kramer multiple comparison test showed no significant difference between mean values of microleakage when groups I, II, and III were compared at 5% and 1% level of significance. Student's unpaired t-test showed a significant difference between mean values of microleakage between group I and group III as well as group I and group II. No significant differences were seen between group II and group III. Conclusion: Among all the groups checked, group III (Cention N) showed the highest sealing ability as an intra-orifice barrier. Clinical significance: Intra-orifice barrier acts as a double seal and minimizes the amount of microleakage coronally in root canal-treated teeth. Immediate placement of additional material in the orifices acts as a secondary line of defense along with temporary filling after obturation.
Möller AJ, Fabricius L, Dahlén G, et al. Influence on periapical tissues of indigenous oral bacteria and necrotic pulp tissue in monkeys. Scand J Dent Res 1981;89(6):475–484. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.1981.tb01711.x
Bergenholtz G. Micro-organisms from necrotic pulp of traumatized teeth. Odontol Revy 1974;25(4):347–358. PMID: 4155793.
Madison S, Wilcox LR. An evaluation of coronal microleakage in endodontically treated teeth. Part III. In vivo study. J Endod 1988;14(9):455–458. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(88)80135-3
Bystrom A, Sundqvist G. The antibacterial action of sodium hypochlorite and EDTA in 60 cases of endodontic therapy. Int Endod J 1985;18(1):35–40. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1985.tb00416.x
Derkson G, Pashley DH, Derkson M. Microleakage measurement of selected restorative materials: a new in vitro method. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56(4):435–440. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(86)90384-7
Amlani H, Hegde V. Microleakage: apical seal vs coronal seal. World J Dent 2013;4(2):113–116. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1215
Andersons RW, Powell B, Pashley DH. Microleakage of three temporary endodontic restorations. J Endod 1988;14(10):497–501. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(88)80107-9
Khayat A, Lee S-J, Torabinejad M. Human saliva penetration of coronally unsealed obturated root canals. J Endod 1993;19(9):458–461. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80533-9
Swanson K, Madison S. An evaluation of coronal microleakage in endodontically treated teeth. Part I. Time periods. J Endod 1987;13(2):56–59. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(87)80155-3
Ray H, Trope M. Periapical status of endodontically treated teeth in relation to the technical quality of the root filling and the coronal restoration. Int Endod J 1995;28(1):12–18. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1995.tb00150.x
Aboobaker S, Nair BG, Gopal R, et al. Effect of intra-orifice barriers on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth—an ex vivo study. J Clin Diagn Res 2015;9(2):17–20. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/11609.5552
Jenkins S, Kulild J, Williams K, et al. Sealing ability of three materials in the orifice of root canal systems obturated with gutta-percha. J Endod 2006;32(3):225–227. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.10.042
Hegde MN, Deepali S. Coronal microleakage of four restorative materials used in endodontically treated teeth as a coronal barrier—an in vitro study. Endodontology 2008;20(2):27–35. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.3639.3607
Bhatia HP, Singh S, Sood S, et al. A comparative evaluation of sorption, solubility, and compressive strength of three different glass ionomer cements in artificial saliva: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2017;10(1):49–54. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1407
Van Ende A, De Munck J, Lise DP, et al. Bulk fill composites: a review of the current literature. J Adhes Dent 2017;19(2):95–109. DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a38141
Bhullar KK, Malhotra S, Nain R, et al. Comparative evaluation of intraorifice sealing ability of different materials in endodontically treated teeth: an in vitro study. J Int Clin Dent Res Organ 2019;11(1):14–19. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.131783
Torabinejad M, Ung B, Kettering JD. In vitro bacterial penetration of coronally unsealed endodontically treated teeth. J Endod 1990;16(12):566–569. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(07)80198-1
Magura ME, Kafrawy AH, Brown CE, et al. Human saliva coronal microleakage in obturated root canals: an in vitro study. J Endod 1991;17(7):324–331. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81700-0
Hariramani S, Gaddalay S, Kale A, et al. Evaluation of microleakage of 3 different materials used as intra-orifice barrier in endodontically treated teeth: an in vitro study. IJCAR 2018;7(4):11869–11872. DOI: 10.24327/ijcar.2018.11872.2069
Ziang Q, Zhang HE. An evaluation of intra-orifice sealing materials for coronal microleakage in obturated root canals. Quintessence 2009;12(1):31–36.
Maloney SM, McClanahan SB, Goodell GG. The effect of thermocycling on a colored glass ionomer intracoronal barrier. J Endod 2005;31(7):526–528. DOI: 10.1097/01.don.0000148870.34600.ea
Patel P, Shah M, Agrawal N, et al. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of class II cavities restored with different bulk fill composite restorative systems: an in vitro study. J Res Adv Dent 2016;5(2):52–62.
Nusrath P, Koppolu M, Chinni S, et al. Comparison of microleakage of zirconia induced glass ionomer and flowable composite as coronal orifice barrier materials—an in vitro study. Arch Dent Med Res 2016;2(2):18–24.
Mazumdar P, Das A, Das UK. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three different direct restorative materials (silver amalgam, glass ionomer cement, Cention N), in class II restorations using stereomicroscope: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2019;30(2): 277–281. DOI: 10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_481_17
Meshram P, Meshram V, Palve D, et al. Comparative evaluation of microleakage around Class V cavities restored with alkasite restorative material with and without bonding agent and flowable composite resin: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2019;30(3): 403–407. DOI: 10.4103/ijdr.ijdr_767_17
Karagenç B, Gençoglu N, Ersoy M, et al. A comparison of four different microleakage tests for assessment of leakage of root canal fillings. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006;102(1):110–113. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.10.044
Alani AH, Toh CG. Detection of microleakage around dental restorations: a review. Oper Dent 1997;22(4):173–185. PMID: 9484158.
Jacobsen PH, Von Fraunhofer JA. Assessment of microleakage using a conductimetric technique. J Dent Res 1975;54(1):41–48. DOI: 10.1177/00220345750540013401
Going RE, Myers HM, Prussin SG. Quantitative method for studying microleakage in vivo and in vitro. J Dent Res 1968;47(6):1128–1132. DOI: 10.1177/00220345680470061901
Gogna R, Jagadis S, Shashikal K. A comparative in vitro study of microleakage by a radioactive isotope and compressive strength of three nanofilled composite resin restorations. J Conserv Dent 2011;14(2):128–131. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.82609
Mayer T, Eickholz P. Microleakage of temporary restorations after thermocycling and mechanical loading. J Endod 1997;23(5):320–322. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(97)80414-1
Siqueira JF, Lopes HP, de Uzeda M. Recontamination of coronally unsealed root canals medicated with camphorated paramonochlorophenol or calcium hydroxide pastes after saliva challenge. J Endod 1998;24(1):11–14. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(98)80204-5
Tamse A, Katz A, Kablan F. Comparison of apical leakage shown by four different dyes with two evaluating methods. Int Endod J 1998;31(5):333–337. PMID: 9823135. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.1998.00154.x
Ahlberg KM, Assavanop P, Tay WM. A comparison of the apical dye penetration patterns shown by methylene blue and India ink in rootfilled teeth. Int Endod J 1995;28(1):30–34. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1995.tb00153.x.
Yazici AR, Baseren M, Dayangac B. The effect of flowable resin composite on microleakage in Class V cavities. Oper Dent 2003;28(1):42–46. PMID: 14653293.
Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Composite restorations: influence of flowable and self curing resin composite lining on microleakage in vitro. Oper Dent 2002;27(6):569–575. PMID: 12413221.
George P, Bhandary S. A comparative microleakage analysis of a newer restorative material—an ex vivo study. IOSR J Dent Med Sci 2018;17(12):56–60. DOI: 10.9790/0853-1712045660
Sahadev CK, Bharath MJ, Sandeep R, et al. An-invitro comparative evaluation of marginal microleakage of cention-N with bulk-fil SDR and zirconomer: a confocal microscopic study. Int J Sci Res 2018;7(7):635–638. DOI: 10.21275/ART20182483
Dodiya PV, Parekh V, Gupta MS, et al. Clinical evaluation of Cention-N and nano hybrid composite resin as a restoration of noncarious cervical lesion. J Dent Specialities 2019;7(1):3–5. DOI: 10.18231/j.jds.2019.001
Iftikhar N, Devashish, Srivastava B, et al. A comparative evaluation of mechanical properties of four different restorative materials: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019;12(1):47–49. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1592