Medical and Dental Consultants’ Association of Nigeria
Home - About us - Editorial board - Search - Ahead of print - Current issue - Archives - Submit article - Instructions - Subscribe - Advertise - Contacts - Login 
  Users Online: 1890   Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 17  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 667-672

Comparative evaluation of the fracture resistances of endodontically treated teeth filled using five different root canal filling systems


1 Private Practice, Faculty of Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey
2 Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey

Correspondence Address:
R F Kaptan
Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Yeditepe University, Bagdat Cad. No: 238 34728 Göztepe, Istanbul
Turkey
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1119-3077.144375

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the fracture resistances of teeth filled using different root canal sealers and rials. Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty single rooted mandibular human incisor teeth with single canals were divided into 5 experimental groups of 20 teeth with 2 control groups of 10 teeth each. After root canal shaping using K3 rotary instruments, root canals were filled as follows: Group 1: (−) control, Group 2: (+) control, Group 3: Gutta-percha/AH Plus, Group 4: Thermafil/AH Plus, Group 5: Resilon/Epiphany self-etch (Epiphany SE), Group 6: Gutta-percha/Epiphany SE ve Group 7: EndoREZ sealer/EndoREZ cone. After the root canal sealers set, the apical 4 mm. portions of the specimens were embedded in cold curing acrylic and a fracture resistance test was applied in a universal testing machine. The load at which fracture occurred was recorded for each group and statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's honestly significant difference tests. Results: Resilon/Epiphany SE ve EndoREZ sealer/EndoREZ cone groups had lower fracture resistances compared with the negative control group consisted of teeth without root canal shaping (P < 0.05). Gutta-percha/AH Plus, Thermafil/AH Plus and Gutta-percha/Epiphany SE groups showed similar fracture resistances (P > 0.05). The fracture resistance of the instrumented, but unfilled positive control group was significantly lower compared with (−) control, Gutta-percha/AH Plus, Thermafil/AH Plus (P < 0.01) and Gutta-percha/Epiphany SE (P < 0.05) groups. There were no significant differences between the fracture resistances of the Resilon/Epiphany SE and EndoREZ sealer/EndoREZ cone and positive control groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Root canal shaping procedures decrease the fracture resistance of teeth, and lateral condensation performed with AH Plus sealer and Gutta-percha and the Thermafil technique were found to be more successful.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2215    
    Printed48    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded8123    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal