Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (Jun 2024)

Intratubular Penetration and Push-out Bond Strength of AH Plus, GuttaFlow 2 and GuttaFlow Bioseal Sealers: An In-vitro Study

  • Sangham Madakwade,
  • Chetana Sachin Makade,
  • Pratima Shenoi,
  • Mohit Gunwal,
  • Simran Gupta

DOI
https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2024/70494.19565
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 18, no. 06
pp. 52 – 55

Abstract

Read online

Introduction: The root canal obturating material provides a three-dimensional fluid-impervious seal. Root canal sealers play a major role in providing a seal between the core material and the tooth for the long-term success of endodontic treatment. Aim: To evaluate the intratubular penetration and Bond Strength (BS) and push-out BS of AH Plus, GuttaFlow 2, and GuttaFlow Bioseal sealers. Materials and Methods: The in-vitro study was conducted in the Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics at Ranjeet Deshmukh Dental College and Research Centre, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India, from October 2019 to April 2021. A total of 75 human mandibular first premolars were decoronated at the Cemento-enamel Junction (CEJ) with a standardised length of 16 mm. The root canal was prepared using the crown-down technique with HyFlex Electrical Discharge Machining (EDM) rotary files and divided into three groups: Group-I: AH Plus, Group-II: GuttaFlow 2, and Group-III: GuttaFlow Bioseal. 0.1% Rhodamine B dye was added to the sealer and obturated using the single cone technique. These samples were transversely sectioned into beams at the middle third of the root. A confocal laser scanning microscope was used to evaluate the depth of sealer penetration in the dentinal tubule, and a Universal Testing Machine was utilised to measure the push-out BS (MPa). The recorded data were subjected to statistical analysis {one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test, Tukey’s post-hoc test, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient}. Results: The results obtained indicated that there was a significant difference in the depth of penetration and push-out BS of AH Plus and GuttaFlow 2 sealers (p <0.0001). However, there was no significant difference found between AH Plus and GuttaFlow Bioseal sealers (p=0.206). In addition, there was no significant difference in the correlation between intratubular penetration and push-out BS of the sealers (negative correlation). Conclusion: Considering the results, the GuttaFlow Bioseal sealer was found to have comparable clinical performance with AH Plus sealer; hence, it can be used as an acceptable root canal sealer.

Keywords