Cargando…
A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study
AIMS: The present study aimed to compare apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH Plus. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Eighty extracted human maxillary anterior teeth with fully formed apex and straight root were collected for this study. The root canals were cleaned and shaped using a standard step b...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4981942/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27583228 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0762.186794 |
_version_ | 1782447680017924096 |
---|---|
author | Patil, Prajakta Rathore, Vishnu P. S. Hotkar, Chetan Savgave, Snehal S. Raghavendra, K. Ingale, Priya |
author_facet | Patil, Prajakta Rathore, Vishnu P. S. Hotkar, Chetan Savgave, Snehal S. Raghavendra, K. Ingale, Priya |
author_sort | Patil, Prajakta |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: The present study aimed to compare apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH Plus. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Eighty extracted human maxillary anterior teeth with fully formed apex and straight root were collected for this study. The root canals were cleaned and shaped using a standard step back preparation to size 60# master apical file at the established working length and divided into four groups: Group 1, GuttaFlow sealer with gutta-percha; Group 2, AH Plus sealer with gutta-percha; Group 3, positive control group (Teeth were instrumented and left without obturation); Group 4, negative control group (Teeth were totally coated with nail varnish) Dye leakage was carried out. Statistical analysis was done using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software and Student's unpaired t-test. RESULTS: The GuttaFlow group had a mean leakage of 1.38 mm whereas AH Plus had a mean of 1.425 mm. The standard deviation of GuttaFlow and AH Plus were 0.3861 and 0.3226, respectively. Student's unpaired t-test disclosed no significant difference (P < 0.05) between the groups. CONCLUSION: None of the sealers used in the study could completely seal the apical foramen to have a fluid-tight seal. GuttaFlow and AH Plus showed no statistically significant difference in microleakage; the better result was shown by GuttaFlow. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4981942 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49819422016-08-31 A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study Patil, Prajakta Rathore, Vishnu P. S. Hotkar, Chetan Savgave, Snehal S. Raghavendra, K. Ingale, Priya J Int Soc Prev Community Dent Original Article AIMS: The present study aimed to compare apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH Plus. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Eighty extracted human maxillary anterior teeth with fully formed apex and straight root were collected for this study. The root canals were cleaned and shaped using a standard step back preparation to size 60# master apical file at the established working length and divided into four groups: Group 1, GuttaFlow sealer with gutta-percha; Group 2, AH Plus sealer with gutta-percha; Group 3, positive control group (Teeth were instrumented and left without obturation); Group 4, negative control group (Teeth were totally coated with nail varnish) Dye leakage was carried out. Statistical analysis was done using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software and Student's unpaired t-test. RESULTS: The GuttaFlow group had a mean leakage of 1.38 mm whereas AH Plus had a mean of 1.425 mm. The standard deviation of GuttaFlow and AH Plus were 0.3861 and 0.3226, respectively. Student's unpaired t-test disclosed no significant difference (P < 0.05) between the groups. CONCLUSION: None of the sealers used in the study could completely seal the apical foramen to have a fluid-tight seal. GuttaFlow and AH Plus showed no statistically significant difference in microleakage; the better result was shown by GuttaFlow. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4981942/ /pubmed/27583228 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0762.186794 Text en Copyright: © Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Patil, Prajakta Rathore, Vishnu P. S. Hotkar, Chetan Savgave, Snehal S. Raghavendra, K. Ingale, Priya A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study |
title | A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study |
title_full | A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study |
title_fullStr | A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study |
title_short | A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study |
title_sort | comparison of apical sealing ability between guttaflow and ah plus: an in vitro study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4981942/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27583228 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2231-0762.186794 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT patilprajakta acomparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT rathorevishnups acomparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT hotkarchetan acomparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT savgavesnehals acomparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT raghavendrak acomparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT ingalepriya acomparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT patilprajakta comparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT rathorevishnups comparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT hotkarchetan comparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT savgavesnehals comparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT raghavendrak comparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy AT ingalepriya comparisonofapicalsealingabilitybetweenguttaflowandahplusaninvitrostudy |