Porosity distribution in apically perforated curved root canals filled with two different calcium silicate based materials and techniques: A micro-computed tomography study

S. Drukteinis, V. Peciuliene, H. Shemesh, P. Tusas, R. Bendinskaite

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The present study evaluated the porosity distribution of BioRoot RCS/single gutta-percha point (BR/SC) and MTA flow (MF) fillings, which were used as plugs for the apical perforation repair in curved canals of extracted mandibular molars using micro-computed tomography (μCT). Forty mesial root canals of mandibular first molars were shaped with ProTaper NEXT X1–X5 files 2 mm beyond the apex to simulate apical perforations that were randomly divided into two groups (n = 20) according to the material and technique used for the apical plug: BR/SC or MF. The specimens were scanned before and after canal filling at an isotropic resolution of 9.9 μm. The volumetric analysis of voids in the apical 5 mm of the fillings was performed. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni correction (p < 0.05). Micro-computed tomography (µCT) evaluation revealed significant differences between the groups in terms of porosity: the total volume and percentage volume of voids was lower in the BR/SC group in comparison with the MF group (p < 0.05), with the predominance of open pores in both groups. Neither of the materials and/or application techniques were able to produce void-free root fillings in the apical region of artificially perforated curved roots of mandibular molars.
Original languageEnglish
Article number1729
Number of pages9
JournalMaterials
Volume12
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2019

Bibliographical note

Export Date: 22 October 2019

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Porosity distribution in apically perforated curved root canals filled with two different calcium silicate based materials and techniques: A micro-computed tomography study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this