An in-vitro comparison of bacterial microleakage of zinc-oxide eugenol and brasseler biceramic seale

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: New sealers have been placed on the market to improve the property of a hermetic seal within the root canal and decrease the gap between the gutta-percha and dentin wall. Differences in the adhesive properties of endodontic sealers may be expected because their interaction with either dentin or gutta-percha may vary with their chemical composition. No specific interaction either with dentin or gutta-percha is expected from the setting reaction of calcium hydroxide based sealers and the epoxy-based sealers. The setting reaction of the zinc oxide-eugenol mixtures is a chelation reaction occurring with the zinc ion of the zinc oxide. Development and maintenance of the seal are essential to optimize the long-term success rate of root canal treatment. An ideal endodontic sealer should, in part, adhere firmly both to dentin and gutta-percha. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the sealing properties of EndoSequence BC sealer TM ,a bioceramic sealer, and Roth’s sealer using gutta-percha with warm vertical condensation and using the single cone technique with the EndoSequence BC sealer only. The goal is to see if there is a significant difference in microleakage between teeth sealed with the bioceramic sealer and teeth sealed with Roth’s sealer. MATERIALS & METHODS: Eighty-five single-rooted maxillary anterior teeth were used for this study. Endodontic cleaning and shaping of each root canal system was accomplished using K-type hand files and NiTi Rotary files. Group A consisted of twenty-seven anterior teeth, which were obturated using EndoSequence BC sealer and gutta-percha with System B and Obtura. Another twenty-seven anterior teeth, Group B, was obturated using Roth’s sealer and gutta-percha with System B and Obtura. A final group, Group C with 27 teeth was obturated using the single cone technique by means of a single gutta-percha point with Endosequence BC sealer. Two teeth were used as a positive control group, and two other teeth as a negative control group. A microbial leakage apparatus was constructed using a similar two-chamber method described by Torabinejad et al. E. faecalis ATCC 29212 was the test bacteria which was used in this study to determine microleakage The outcome of interest (bacterial turbidity) and time-to-leakage (in days), will be determined for each of the samples. Survival analysis will be used to compare the two groups, with a Kaplan-Meier plot to visualize the results and a nonparametric log-rank test for the group comparison RESULTS: No microleakage was observed in the negative control or group B. Microleakage was observed in all the positive control. Group A and C had a significantly higher proportion of samples with microleakage than group B (p<0.0001), but group A and C were not significantly different from each other (p=0.50). Time to microleakage was also significantly lower in group A and C than group B (p<0.0001), but group A and C were not significantly different from each other (p=0.37). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, using E. faecalis as our test bacteria, the microleakage of canals obturated with gutta percha and Roth's sealer was significantly less than canals obturated with gutta percha and EndoSequence BC sealer.