ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the wettability of AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers on intraradicular dentine treated with different irrigating solutions. METHODS: Fifty anterior teeth were decoronated and split longitudinally. Each root half was divided into 5 groups (n=10). Group I: 5mL of 2.5% NaOCl+QMix. Group II: 5mL of 2.5% NaOCl+17% EDTA. Group III: 5mL of 2.5% NaOCl+7% maleic acid. Group IV: 5mL of 2.5% NaOCl. Group V: 5mL of distilled water. Irrigation regimens were performed for 1min. Each specimen was placed inside a Dynamic Contact Angle Analyser. A controlled-volume droplet of sealer was placed on each specimen and the static contact angle was analysed. RESULTS: The contact angle made by both sealers with EDTA-irrigated dentine was significantly larger when compared to the other irrigants (P<0.05). For ThermaSeal Plus, contact angles produced on maleic acid-, NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were all significantly larger than the contact angle produced on QMix-irrigated dentine (P<0.05). For AH Plus, contact angles produced on NaOCl- and distilled water-irrigated dentine were not significantly different, but were significantly larger than those made by maleic acid and QMix. CONCLUSION: When used as a final irrigant, QMix favours the wetting of root canal dentine by both AH Plus and ThermaSeal Plus sealers. Maleic acid shows a promising result when compared to EDTA and NaOCl. Wettability of both sealers is the worst on EDTA-irrigated dentine. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The present study highlights the effect of newer endodontic irrigating solutions on the wettability of sealers on to the root canal dentine, which is required for obtaining good obturation seal.
