ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sealing ability of different repair materials and the pathway of bacterial penetration after closure of large pulp chamber floor perforations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Perforations were made in the furcation area of extracted human molars and sealed with either mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), glass ionomer cement or resin composite. The bacterial leakage method was used with Enterococcus faecalis as microbial tracer. The time of leakage (in days) was recorded for each specimen. Statistical analysis of bacterial leakage was performed using the survival analysis and pairwise comparison of groups. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Leaking specimens were prepared and inspected for the presence of bacteria by a scanning electron microscope (SEM). RESULTS: The percentage of leaking samples was significantly higher in resin composite than in the other groups and the negative control group (p<0.05). SEM inspection revealed the presence of bacteria in all leaking specimens. Bacteria were observed along the filling-dentine interface as well as in dentinal tubules at some distance from the filling. CONCLUSIONS: The resin composite material leaked significantly more than the MTA and glass ionomer cements when used to repair large furcation perforations. Bacteria could penetrate into dentine even at a distance from the perforation filling.
Subject(s)
Aluminum Compounds/chemistry , Calcium Compounds/chemistry , Composite Resins/chemistry , Dental Bonding , Dental Materials/chemistry , Dental Pulp Cavity/injuries , Glass Ionomer Cements/chemistry , Oxides/chemistry , Silicates/chemistry , Tooth Root/injuries , Aluminum Compounds/therapeutic use , Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate/chemistry , Calcium Compounds/therapeutic use , Composite Resins/therapeutic use , Dental Leakage/classification , Dental Leakage/microbiology , Dental Materials/therapeutic use , Dental Pulp Cavity/microbiology , Dentin/microbiology , Dentin/ultrastructure , Drug Combinations , Enterococcus faecalis/isolation & purification , Glass Ionomer Cements/therapeutic use , Humans , Materials Testing , Microscopy, Electron, Scanning , Oxides/therapeutic use , Resin Cements/chemistry , Root Canal Preparation/methods , Silicates/therapeutic use , Time Factors , Tooth Root/microbiologyABSTRACT
AIM: To compare the toxicity of methacrylate resin-based root canal sealers with sealers based on epoxy resin and silicone by two-well established cell culture methods. METHODOLOGY: Specimens of AH Plus, EndoREZ, RoekoSeal and Epiphany were prepared for direct contact in the Millipore filter diffusion test and as extracts in the MTT assay. Mouse fibroblasts (L929) were used as toxicity targets. Differences in cytotoxicity between fresh and set specimens and between the extracts of root canal sealers were determined by t-test (P < 0.05). RESULTS: In the filter diffusion test, freshly mixed Epiphany and AH Plus were rated severely toxic and RoekoSeal and EndoREZ nontoxic. When set, Epiphany was moderately toxic, whereas AH Plus, RoekoSeal and EndoREZ were nontoxic. Epiphany was significantly more toxic than RoekoSeal and EndoREZ (P < 0.05). In the MTT assay with set specimens, Epiphany was rated severely toxic; AH Plus and RoekoSeal slightly toxic; and EndoREZ nontoxic. Epiphany was significantly more toxic than the other three materials in this test (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The multi-methacrylate resin-based (Epiphany) root canal sealer was significantly more toxic to L-929 cells than the silicone-based Roeko Seal and the single methacrylate-based EndoREZ root canal sealers. AH Plus showed intermediate toxicity.
