Impact of Water Solubility on Chemical Composition and Surface Structure of Two Generations of Bioceramic Root Canal Sealers

Comparative Analysis of Interfacial Adaptation and Depth Penetration of Recent HiFlow versus Regular Bioceramic Sealers in Conjunction with BC Gutta-Percha Points Using Two Different Obturation Techniques-A Preliminary Report of an Ex Vivo Study

This study aimed to assess the adaptability and penetration depth capacity of recent bioceramic systems, including regular EndoSequence (BC) versus HiFlow (BCH) sealers in the presence of BC points. A total of 54 single-rooted teeth were instrumented and obturated with either the cold or warm compaction technique (n = 9), using either BC, BCH, or AH Plus (AHP) combined with BC points. The adaptation, film thickness, and gaps/voids were evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. The sealer/dentin interface was evaluated by Raman spectroscopy, and depth penetration was evaluated by a confocal laser scanning microscope. According to the normality test, the data were statistically analyzed by ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests at p < 0.05. BCH sealer showed the significantly thinnest film with the greatest flow (p > 0.001), with further improvement when subjected to the warm compaction technique. Moreover, it exhibited close adaptation with deep penetration into radicular dentin, forming a tag-like structure. The Raman spectra also indicated close contact with the dentin surface. The use of BC sealer with BC points exhibited homogenous, single-unit obturation, either with a cold or warm technique. Furthermore, the use of the warm compaction technique with BCH sealer achieved a gap-free interface associated with tag-like structures, which exhibit the monoblock phenomenon.

Physicochemical properties of AH plus bioceramic sealer, Bio-C Sealer, and ADseal root canal sealer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the physicochemical properties of two newly introduced premixed calcium silicate-based root canal sealers (AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer and Bio-C Sealer) compared to a resin-based root canal sealer (ADseal root canal sealer).

METHODS

Solubility, pH analysis, calcium ion release, and film thickness of each sealer were evaluated following ISO guidelines. The data were examined using the two-way ANOVA test. Furthermore, X-ray diffraction (XRD) examination was performed to investigate the crystalline phase of each type of sealer. X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis was done for the chemical elemental analysis of each sealer.

RESULTS

The least film thickness, highest alkalinity, and highest calcium ion release were all displayed by AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer. High solubility, high alkalinity, intermediate calcium ion release, and intermediate film thickness were all displayed by Bio-C Sealer. While ADseal root canal sealer displayed the greatest film thickness, least solubility, alkalinity, and calcium ion release.

CONCLUSIONS

Both AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer and Bio-C Sealer represented adequate properties to be considered a good sealer that could be used as a potential alternative to resin-based root canal sealers.