Objective Proper seal achieved via placement of an effective intraorifice barrier curtails the occurrence of post-bleaching consequences and reinforces the cervical tooth structure. Hence, our present study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of three different light-cure biomaterials as an intraorifice barrier. Methodology Forty-eight sound human premolars were obtained, and root canal treatment procedures were accomplished according to the standard protocol. Gutta-percha was removed from the cementoenamel junction to a uniform depth of 3 mm, and the barrier materials were placed according to the respective groups (n=16 each): Group I: resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (Ionoseal, VOCO, Innovative Biotherapies, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States), Group II: TheraCal LC (Bisco, Inc., Schaumburg, Illinois, United States), and Group III: bulk-fill composite (BFC) (Tetric N-Ceram, Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc., Schaan, Liechtenstein). Eight samples from each group were coated with nail varnish, submerged in 2% methylene blue for 24 hours, and evaluated for sealing ability using ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) spectrophotometry. The remaining eight samples from each group were subjected to push-out bond strength evaluation using the universal testing machine. Values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Scheffe's t-test. Result TheraCal LC showed the highest mean value of sealing ability to other groups; however, there is an insignificant difference compared with BFC. Push-out bond strength values are increasing, with Group II being the lowest, followed by Group I and the BFC group demonstrating superior performance. Conclusion TheraCal LC exhibited the least microleakage among the experimental groups. Yet BFC stands out to be a reliable material of choice owing to its superior strength and fairly acceptable sealing ability.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11890602 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.78587 | DOI Listing |
Cureus
February 2025
Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, KSR Institute of Dental Science and Research, Tiruchengode, IND.
Objective Proper seal achieved via placement of an effective intraorifice barrier curtails the occurrence of post-bleaching consequences and reinforces the cervical tooth structure. Hence, our present study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of three different light-cure biomaterials as an intraorifice barrier. Methodology Forty-eight sound human premolars were obtained, and root canal treatment procedures were accomplished according to the standard protocol.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Conserv Dent Endod
December 2024
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, KIMS Dental College and Hospital, Amalapuram, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Aims: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using three different intra-orifice barriers.
Settings And Design: This study was conducted at the department of conservative dentistry and endodontics, an study.
Subjects And Methods: Forty freshly extracted single-rooted mandibular bicuspids ( = 40) were decoronated to obtain a 14-mm standard root length and all the canals were enlarged with ProTaper up to size F3 and they were obturated with gutta-percha using AH Plus sealer and randomly divided into 4 groups ( = 10).
Cureus
September 2024
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sharad Pawar Dental College and Hospital, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha, IND.
Cureus
September 2024
Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Goa Dental College and Hospital, Panaji, IND.
Aim: This study aimed to assess and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth using three new intraorifice barrier materials.
Materials And Methods: A total of 60 extracted human mandibular premolars having single roots were decoronated to 14 mm length, prepared up to rotary F3 ProTaper Gold files, and sealed with gutta-percha and AH Plus sealer. Specimens were divided into one control and three experimental groups ( = 15): Group 1, control; Group 2, Biodentine (Septodont, Saint Maur des Fosses, France); Group 3, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC, GC Gold Label 2 LC, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan); and Group 4, flowable nanohybrid composite (G-aenial Universal Flo, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan).
F1000Res
July 2024
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sharad Pawar Dental College, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Background: Endodontic treatment is the most common method for resolving pulpal and periapical pathology. However, various studies have reported that almost 11%-13% of all teeth that undergo extraction after endodontic treatment show the presence of cracks, craze lines, and vertical root fractures. Teeth with inadequate post endodontic restoration are more prone to fracture and coronal leakage, resulting in the diffusion of oral fluids, bacteria, bacterial products, and possibly root canal treatment failure.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!