Retrievability of bioceramic-based sealers in comparison with epoxy resin-based sealer assessed using microcomputed tomography: A systematic review of laboratory-based studies

Aim:

The objective was to evaluate the retrievability of bioceramic sealers in comparison with epoxy resin-based sealers assessed using microcomputed tomography.

Materials and Methods:

Four reviewers independently conducted a systematic literature search in four electronic databases. The risk of bias was assessed using modified Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tools for Quasi-Experimental Studies.

Results:

Ten articles were included in this review and all had a moderate risk of bias. The results across the included articles were inconsistent with some indicating easier/difficult removal of bioceramic sealers, while others indicate no difference. The studies varied in terms of the type of bioceramic sealer used, root canal anatomy, and retreatment techniques followed. Due to heterogeneity, only a qualitative analysis was performed and no meta-analysis was conducted.

Conclusion:

The quality of evidence is low and no definitive conclusion could be derived regarding the retrievability of bioceramic sealer/AH plus sealer from the root canals during retreatment procedures.

Effectiveness of supplementary irrigant agitation with the Finisher GF Brush on the debridement of oval root canals instrumented with the Gentlefile or nickel titanium rotary instruments

AIM

To examine the efficacy of a novel supplementary irrigant agitating brush (Finisher GF Brush, MedicNRG, Kibbutz Afikim, Israel) on the debridement of root canals prepared with a novel stainless steel rotary instrumentation system (Gentlefile; MedicNRG), or nickel titanium rotary instruments in oval root canals.

METHODOLOGY

Mandibular premolars (n = 72) were selected and divided randomly into three experimental groups (n = 24) after microCT scanning: group 1, canal preparation to rotary NiTi size 20, .04 taper (R20); group 2, rotary NiTi to size 25, .04 taper (R25) and group 3, Gentlefile size 23, .04 taper (GF). Specimens were subdivided into two subgroups: subgroup A, syringe-and-needle irrigation (SNI); subgroup B, Finisher GF Brush (GB). Ten untreated canals served as controls. Specimens were processed for histological evaluation, and the remaining pulp tissue (RPT) was measured. Data were analysed using Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests (P = 0.05).

RESULTS

All experimental groups had significantly less RPT than the control (P < 0.05). Group 3B (GF-GB) had significantly less RPT than groups 1B (R20-GB) and 2B (R25-GF; P < 0.05). When irrigated with SNI, there was no significant difference in the RPT between the three groups (P > 0.05). When instrumented with R20, there was no significant difference between SNI and GF (P < 0.05) whilst GB had significantly less RPT than SNI for R25 (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Supplementary irrigant agitation with the Finisher GF Brush improved the debridement of canals prepared with Gentlefile and size 25, .04 taper rotary NiTi. Root canal debridement did not significantly differ between the instruments when syringe irrigation was used.