Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopic Evaluation of Sealer Penetration in Root Canals of Teeth with the butterfly and Non-butterfly Effect: An In vitro Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2020.5168Keywords:
Butterfly effec, Confocal laser scanning microscopy, Sealapex, Sealer penetrationAbstract
AIM: The study aimed to investigate the penetration depth of calcium hydroxide-based root canal sealer into buccolingual and mesiodistal aspects of roots with and without the butterfly effect at coronal and middle root sections.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty single-rooted maxillary premolars were decoronated at the cementoenamel junction and viewed under a light microscope and grouped as Group 1 – butterfly (B) and Group 2 – non-butterfly according to the presence or absence of the effect. Canals were prepared till working length followed with copious irrigation. Canals were finally rinsed with 5 ml of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid solution and activated using EndoActivator followed by obturation using gutta-percha (warm vertical compaction technique) with Sealapex sealer. To provide fluorescence for confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM), the Sealapex was mixed with rhodamine B dye. Root sectioning yielded coronal and middle sections. CLSM was used to assess the penetration of the sealer.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Shapiro–Wilk test, unpaired “t-test.”
RESULTS: Teeth with the butterfly effect had greater mean penetration buccolingually (905.2 μm) than mesiodistally (182.1 μm; p < 0.001). Coronal sections had greater penetration (517.4 μm) compared with the middle (354.6 μm).
CONCLUSION: Sealapex sealer exhibited maximum tubular penetration in teeth with butterfly effect in buccolingual direction at the coronal third level.
Downloads
Metrics
Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block
References
Nikhil V, Singh R. Confocal laser scanning microscopic investigation of ultrasonic, sonic, and rotary sealer placement techniques. J Conserv Dent. 2013;16(4):294- 9. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.114348 PMid:23956528
Khandelwal D, Ballal NV. Recent advances in root canal sealers. Int J Clin Dent. 2016;9(3):183-94.
Hoen MM, LaBounty GL, Keller DL. Ultrasonic endodontic sealer placement. J Endod. 1988;14(4):169- 74. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-2399(88)80257-7 PMid:3268635
Orstavik D. Materials used for root canal obturation: Technical, biological and clinical testing. Endod Topics. 2005;12:25-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00197.x
Vitti RP, Prati C, Silva EJ, Sinhoreti MA, Zanchi CH, de Souza e Silva MG, et al. Physical properties of MTA fillapex sealer. J Endod. 2013;39(7):915-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.04.015 PMid:23791263
Beust TB. Reactions of the dentinal fibril to external irritation. J Am Dent Assoc. 1931;18(6):1060-73.
Vasiliadis L, Darling AI, Levers BG. The amount and distribution of sclerotic human root dentine. Arch Oral Biol. 1983;28(7):645- 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(83)90013-4
Russell AA, Chandler NP, Hauman C, Siddiqui AY, Tompkins GR. The butterfly effect: An investigation of sectioned roots. J Endod. 2013;39(2):208-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2012.09.016 PMid:23321232
Russell A, Friedlander L, Chandler N. Sealer penetration and adaptation in root canals with the butterfly effect. Aust Endod J. 2018;44(3):225-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12238 PMid:29034531
Russell A. The Butterfly Effect: An Investigation of Sealer Penetration, Adaptation and Apical Crack Formation in Filled Root Canals, Doctoral Dissertation. New Zealand: University of Otago.
Desai S, Chandler N. Calcium hydroxide-based root canal sealers: A review. J Endod. 2009;35(4):475- 80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2008.11.026 PMid:19345790
Arikatla SK, Chalasani U, Mandava J, Yelisela RK. Interfacial adaptation and penetration depth of bioceramic endodontic sealers. J Conserv Dent. 2018;21(4):373-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/jcd.jcd_64_18 PMid:30122816
Nielsen BA, Craig Baumgartner J. Comparison of the EndoVac system to needle irrigation of root canals. J Endod. 2007;33(5):611-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2007.01.020 PMid:17437884
Kuci A, Alacam T, Yavas O, Ergul-Ulger Z, Kayaoglu G. Sealer penetration into dentinal tubules in the presence or absence of smear layer: A confocal laser scanning microscopic study. J Endod. 2014;40(10):1627-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.03.019 PMid:25260735
Love RM, Jenkinson HF. Invasion of dentinal tubules by oral Bacteria. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2002;13:171-83. PMid:12097359
Dalmia S, Gaikwad A, Samuel R, Aher G, Gulve M, Kolhe S. Antimicrobial efficacy of different endodontic sealers against Enterococcus faecalis: An in vitro study. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2018;8(2):104-9. https://doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.jispcd_29_18 PMid:29780734
Cobankara FK, Orucoglu H, Sengun A, Belli S. The quantitative evaluation of apical sealing of four endodontic sealers. J Endod. 2006;32:66-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.10.019 PMid:16410073
Ishimura H, Yoshioka T, Suda H. Sealing ability of new adhesive root canal filling materials measured by new dye penetration method. Dent Mater J. 2007;26(2):290-5. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.26.290 PMid:17621947
Von Arx T, Steiner RG, Tay FR. Apical surgery: Endoscopic findings at the resection level of 168 consecutively treated roots. Int Endod J. 2011;44(4):290- 302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01811.x PMid:21226737
Sahu Y, Deshmukh P, Jain A, Sahu A. The butterfly effect: An investigation of hardness and density of sectioned roots. J Oral Dent Health. 2017;1(3):1-4.
Carrigan PJ, Morse DR, Furst ML, Sinai IH. A scanning electron microscopic evaluation of human dentinal tubules according to age and location. J Endod. 1984;10(8):359- 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0099-2399(84)80155-7 PMid:6590745
Ma J, Shen Y, Yang Y, Gao Y, Wan P, Gan Y, et al. In vitro study ofcalcium hydroxide removal from mandibular molar root canals. J Endod. 2015;41(4):553-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.11.023 PMid:25596727
De-Deus G, Gurgel-Filho ED, Maniglia-Ferreira C, Coutinho- Filho T. Influence of the filling technique on depth of tubular penetration of root canal sealer: A scanning eletron microscopy study. Braz J Oral Sci. 2016;12:433-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4477.2004.tb00164.x
Gutmann JL. Adaptation of injected thermoplasticized gutta-percha in the absence of the dentinal smear layer. Int Endod J. 1993;26(2):87-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1993.tb00548.x PMid:8330939
Kumar VR, Bahuguna N, Manan R. Comparison of efficacy of various root canal irrigation systems in removal of smear layer generated at apical third: An SEM study. J Conserv Dent. 2015;18(3):252-6. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.157267 PMid:26069415
Montero-Miralles P, Castillo-Oyague R, de la Fuente IS, Lynch CD, Castillo-Dali G, Torres-Lagares D. Effect of the Nd:YAG laser on sealer penetration into root canal surfaces: A confocal microscope analysis. J Dent. 2014;42(6):753-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.03.017 PMid:24721523
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Abraham Sathish, Karad Rohini Ramesh, N. Jain Ruchika, D. Vaswani Sneha, B. Najan Harshal, R. Lalwani Rashi (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
