Wettability of root canal sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions

Nidambur Vasudev Ballal, Adlyn Tweeny, Khaled Khechen, K. Narayan Prabhu, Satyanarayan, Franklin R. Tay

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the wettability of AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions. Methods Fifty anterior teeth were decoronated and split longitudinally. Each root half was divided into 5 groups (n = 10). Group I: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + QMix. Group II: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + 17% EDTA. Group III: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + 7% maleic acid. Group IV: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl. Group V: 5 mL of distilled water. Irrigation regimens were performed for 1 min. Each specimen was placed inside a Dynamic Contact Angle Analyser. A controlled-volume droplet of sealer was placed on each specimen and the static contact angle was analysed. Results The contact angle made by both sealers with EDTA-irrigated dentine was significantly larger when compared to the other irrigants (P < 0.05). For ThermaSeal Plus, contact angles produced on maleic acid-, NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were all significantly larger than the contact angle produced on QMix-irrigated dentine (P < 0.05). For AH Plus, contact angles produced on NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were significantly larger than those made by maleic acid and QMix. Conclusion When used as a final irrigant, QMix favours the wetting of root canal dentine by both AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers. Maleic acid shows a promising result when compared to EDTA and NaOCl. Wettability of both sealers is the worst on EDTA-irrigated dentine. Clinical significance The present study highlights the effect of newer endodontic irrigating solutions on the wettability of sealers on to the root canal dentine, which is required for obtaining good obturation seal.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)556-560
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Dentistry
Volume41
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-06-2013

Fingerprint

Wettability
Dental Pulp Cavity
Dentin
Edetic Acid
Water
canals sealer
Endodontics
Tooth
maleic acid

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Ballal, Nidambur Vasudev ; Tweeny, Adlyn ; Khechen, Khaled ; Prabhu, K. Narayan ; Satyanarayan ; Tay, Franklin R. / Wettability of root canal sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions. In: Journal of Dentistry. 2013 ; Vol. 41, No. 6. pp. 556-560.
@article{171926e74bb848028872aa9ada81fc20,
title = "Wettability of root canal sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions",
abstract = "Objectives The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the wettability of AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions. Methods Fifty anterior teeth were decoronated and split longitudinally. Each root half was divided into 5 groups (n = 10). Group I: 5 mL of 2.5{\%} NaOCl + QMix. Group II: 5 mL of 2.5{\%} NaOCl + 17{\%} EDTA. Group III: 5 mL of 2.5{\%} NaOCl + 7{\%} maleic acid. Group IV: 5 mL of 2.5{\%} NaOCl. Group V: 5 mL of distilled water. Irrigation regimens were performed for 1 min. Each specimen was placed inside a Dynamic Contact Angle Analyser. A controlled-volume droplet of sealer was placed on each specimen and the static contact angle was analysed. Results The contact angle made by both sealers with EDTA-irrigated dentine was significantly larger when compared to the other irrigants (P < 0.05). For ThermaSeal Plus, contact angles produced on maleic acid-, NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were all significantly larger than the contact angle produced on QMix-irrigated dentine (P < 0.05). For AH Plus, contact angles produced on NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were significantly larger than those made by maleic acid and QMix. Conclusion When used as a final irrigant, QMix favours the wetting of root canal dentine by both AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers. Maleic acid shows a promising result when compared to EDTA and NaOCl. Wettability of both sealers is the worst on EDTA-irrigated dentine. Clinical significance The present study highlights the effect of newer endodontic irrigating solutions on the wettability of sealers on to the root canal dentine, which is required for obtaining good obturation seal.",
author = "Ballal, {Nidambur Vasudev} and Adlyn Tweeny and Khaled Khechen and Prabhu, {K. Narayan} and Satyanarayan and Tay, {Franklin R.}",
year = "2013",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jdent.2013.04.005",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "556--560",
journal = "Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0300-5712",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "6",

}

Wettability of root canal sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions. / Ballal, Nidambur Vasudev; Tweeny, Adlyn; Khechen, Khaled; Prabhu, K. Narayan; Satyanarayan; Tay, Franklin R.

In: Journal of Dentistry, Vol. 41, No. 6, 01.06.2013, p. 556-560.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Wettability of root canal sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions

AU - Ballal, Nidambur Vasudev

AU - Tweeny, Adlyn

AU - Khechen, Khaled

AU - Prabhu, K. Narayan

AU - Satyanarayan,

AU - Tay, Franklin R.

PY - 2013/6/1

Y1 - 2013/6/1

N2 - Objectives The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the wettability of AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions. Methods Fifty anterior teeth were decoronated and split longitudinally. Each root half was divided into 5 groups (n = 10). Group I: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + QMix. Group II: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + 17% EDTA. Group III: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + 7% maleic acid. Group IV: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl. Group V: 5 mL of distilled water. Irrigation regimens were performed for 1 min. Each specimen was placed inside a Dynamic Contact Angle Analyser. A controlled-volume droplet of sealer was placed on each specimen and the static contact angle was analysed. Results The contact angle made by both sealers with EDTA-irrigated dentine was significantly larger when compared to the other irrigants (P < 0.05). For ThermaSeal Plus, contact angles produced on maleic acid-, NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were all significantly larger than the contact angle produced on QMix-irrigated dentine (P < 0.05). For AH Plus, contact angles produced on NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were significantly larger than those made by maleic acid and QMix. Conclusion When used as a final irrigant, QMix favours the wetting of root canal dentine by both AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers. Maleic acid shows a promising result when compared to EDTA and NaOCl. Wettability of both sealers is the worst on EDTA-irrigated dentine. Clinical significance The present study highlights the effect of newer endodontic irrigating solutions on the wettability of sealers on to the root canal dentine, which is required for obtaining good obturation seal.

AB - Objectives The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the wettability of AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions. Methods Fifty anterior teeth were decoronated and split longitudinally. Each root half was divided into 5 groups (n = 10). Group I: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + QMix. Group II: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + 17% EDTA. Group III: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl + 7% maleic acid. Group IV: 5 mL of 2.5% NaOCl. Group V: 5 mL of distilled water. Irrigation regimens were performed for 1 min. Each specimen was placed inside a Dynamic Contact Angle Analyser. A controlled-volume droplet of sealer was placed on each specimen and the static contact angle was analysed. Results The contact angle made by both sealers with EDTA-irrigated dentine was significantly larger when compared to the other irrigants (P < 0.05). For ThermaSeal Plus, contact angles produced on maleic acid-, NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were all significantly larger than the contact angle produced on QMix-irrigated dentine (P < 0.05). For AH Plus, contact angles produced on NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were significantly larger than those made by maleic acid and QMix. Conclusion When used as a final irrigant, QMix favours the wetting of root canal dentine by both AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers. Maleic acid shows a promising result when compared to EDTA and NaOCl. Wettability of both sealers is the worst on EDTA-irrigated dentine. Clinical significance The present study highlights the effect of newer endodontic irrigating solutions on the wettability of sealers on to the root canal dentine, which is required for obtaining good obturation seal.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84878016425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84878016425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.04.005

DO - 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.04.005

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 556

EP - 560

JO - Journal of Dentistry

JF - Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0300-5712

IS - 6

ER -