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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Patil, Prajakta, Rathore, Vishnu P. S., Hotkar, Chetan, Savgave, Snehal S., Raghavendra, K., Ingale, Priya
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