Influence of the Remnants of Silicone Oil on Penetration of Three Different Sealers into the Dentinal Tubules: A Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy Study.

IF 1.6 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE European Endodontic Journal Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.14744/eej.2022.54366
Mai Ragab, Marwa Sharaan
{"title":"Influence of the Remnants of Silicone Oil on Penetration of Three Different Sealers into the Dentinal Tubules: A Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy Study.","authors":"Mai Ragab,&nbsp;Marwa Sharaan","doi":"10.14744/eej.2022.54366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to assess penetration of AH Plus, MTA Fillapex and GuttaFlow Bioseal sealers into dentinal tubules after placement and removal of silicone oil using Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty single-canaled premolars were instrumented using ProTaper Universal rotary system. Roots were divided into two main groups (n=30) where either Silicone oil was used or not. Subsequently, each main group was subdivided into 3 subgroups according to the investigated sealers. In subgroups where Silicone oil was used, it was placed in canals and then cleared. Obturation was completed utilizing lateral compaction technique using Rhodamine B labeled sealers. Penetration depth of sealer was evaluated by image J software. One way ANOVA, Duncan's test as posthoc test was performed for evaluation of statistical significances among the groups. In each sealer group, Independent -t-test was used to compare between with and without oil. P value was set at <0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using silicone oil resulted in less dentinal tubule penetration depth with all sealers. Mean dentinal tubule penetration depth was the lowest in apical thirds. AH Plus showed higher penetrability in all thirds compared to MTA Fillapex and GuttaFlow Bioseal despite oil placement and removal. MTA Fillapex displayed higher penetrability in all thirds than GuttaFlow Bioseal.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Remnants of silicone oil has a negative impact on the penetration depth of the tested sealers.</p>","PeriodicalId":11860,"journal":{"name":"European Endodontic Journal","volume":"7 3","pages":"234-240"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/36/44/EEJ-7-234.PMC9608129.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Endodontic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/eej.2022.54366","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess penetration of AH Plus, MTA Fillapex and GuttaFlow Bioseal sealers into dentinal tubules after placement and removal of silicone oil using Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy.

Methods: Sixty single-canaled premolars were instrumented using ProTaper Universal rotary system. Roots were divided into two main groups (n=30) where either Silicone oil was used or not. Subsequently, each main group was subdivided into 3 subgroups according to the investigated sealers. In subgroups where Silicone oil was used, it was placed in canals and then cleared. Obturation was completed utilizing lateral compaction technique using Rhodamine B labeled sealers. Penetration depth of sealer was evaluated by image J software. One way ANOVA, Duncan's test as posthoc test was performed for evaluation of statistical significances among the groups. In each sealer group, Independent -t-test was used to compare between with and without oil. P value was set at <0.05.

Results: Using silicone oil resulted in less dentinal tubule penetration depth with all sealers. Mean dentinal tubule penetration depth was the lowest in apical thirds. AH Plus showed higher penetrability in all thirds compared to MTA Fillapex and GuttaFlow Bioseal despite oil placement and removal. MTA Fillapex displayed higher penetrability in all thirds than GuttaFlow Bioseal.

Conclusion: Remnants of silicone oil has a negative impact on the penetration depth of the tested sealers.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
硅油残留对三种不同封闭剂渗透到牙本质小管的影响:共聚焦激光扫描显微镜研究。
目的:本研究的目的是利用共聚焦激光扫描显微镜评估AH Plus, MTA Fillapex和GuttaFlow Bioseal密封剂在植入和去除硅油后对牙本质小管的渗透。方法:采用ProTaper万能旋转系统对60颗单根前磨牙进行矫治。根被分为两组(n=30),其中使用硅油或不使用硅油。随后,根据调查的海豹,将每一主组再细分为3个亚组。在使用硅油的小组中,将其放置在管道中,然后清除。使用罗丹明B标记封口剂完成侧压实技术的封闭。采用image J软件对封口器的穿透深度进行评价。采用单因素方差分析,邓肯检验作为事后检验来评价组间的统计学显著性。各封口剂组加油与不加油比较采用独立-t检验。结果:使用硅油导致所有密封剂的牙本质小管渗透深度减小。牙本质小管平均穿透深度在根尖三分之一处最低。与MTA Fillapex和GuttaFlow Bioseal相比,AH Plus在所有三分之一层的渗透性都更高,尽管放置和去除了油。MTA Fillapex在三分之二的渗透性均高于GuttaFlow Bioseal。结论:硅油残留对被测封口剂的渗透深度有负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Endodontic Journal
European Endodontic Journal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.60%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Effect of Final Irrigation Solutions on Mechanical Properties of Root Canal Dentine Running title: Final Irrigation on Mechanical Properties. Calcium silicate-based intracanal medication: Physicochemical properties and effectiveness of techniques for removing medication from the human root canal. Increasing the Apical Sizes of Root Enlarged for Root Canal Obturation Influences the Outcome of Single-Root-Canal Teeth Affected by Apical Periodontitis. Regenerative Treatment of Mature Teeth with Pulp Necrosis and Apical Periodontitis Using Biodentine Compared with MTA: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Controversial terminology in root and canal anatomy: A comprehensive review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1