{"title":"Comparison of the Physical Properties of Three Resin-Based Root Canal Sealers: An In-Vitro Study.","authors":"Pegah Sarraf, Sholeh Ghabraei, Zahra Mohammadi, Faranak Noori, Nazanin Chitsaz","doi":"10.18502/fid.v20i34.13651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> This in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the physical properties of three resin-based root canal sealers, including BETA-RCS, AH26, and Adseal. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> Flowability, film-thickness, solubility, and radiopacity of BETA-RCS, AH26, and Adseal sealers were evaluated according to ISO 6876/2012 specifications. Three samples of each sealer were used to test each of the properties. <b>Results:</b> The results revealed that the flow rate (mm) of BETA-RCS, Adseal, and AH26 were 23.06±1.58, 22.5±4.23, and 21.85±1.71, respectively. Film-thickness values (µm) for BETA-RCS, Adseal, and AH26 sealers were 52.33±2.51, 18.66±0.57, and 52±2, respectively. No significant difference was observed regarding film-thickness between AH26 and BETA-RCS (P>0.05), while Adseal showed significantly lower film-thickness (P˂0.05). The highest and lowest solubility were related to BETA-RCS and Adseal, respectively. However, all sealers had acceptable solubility and radiopacity. <b>Conclusion:</b> The findings of the current study suggested that all three root canal sealers including BETA-RCS, AH26, and Adseal had similar properties based on ISO 6876 standard criteria. As such, they could be viable choices for facilitating effective root canal procedures. Further long-term clinical studies are warranted to assess their performance and success rates in actual endodontic cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":12445,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Dentistry","volume":"20 ","pages":"34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/71/f1/FID-20-34.PMC10591020.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/fid.v20i34.13651","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: This in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the physical properties of three resin-based root canal sealers, including BETA-RCS, AH26, and Adseal. Materials and Methods: Flowability, film-thickness, solubility, and radiopacity of BETA-RCS, AH26, and Adseal sealers were evaluated according to ISO 6876/2012 specifications. Three samples of each sealer were used to test each of the properties. Results: The results revealed that the flow rate (mm) of BETA-RCS, Adseal, and AH26 were 23.06±1.58, 22.5±4.23, and 21.85±1.71, respectively. Film-thickness values (µm) for BETA-RCS, Adseal, and AH26 sealers were 52.33±2.51, 18.66±0.57, and 52±2, respectively. No significant difference was observed regarding film-thickness between AH26 and BETA-RCS (P>0.05), while Adseal showed significantly lower film-thickness (P˂0.05). The highest and lowest solubility were related to BETA-RCS and Adseal, respectively. However, all sealers had acceptable solubility and radiopacity. Conclusion: The findings of the current study suggested that all three root canal sealers including BETA-RCS, AH26, and Adseal had similar properties based on ISO 6876 standard criteria. As such, they could be viable choices for facilitating effective root canal procedures. Further long-term clinical studies are warranted to assess their performance and success rates in actual endodontic cases.