Premium
Light‐cured glass ionomer cement as a retrograde root seal
Author(s) -
CHONG B. S.,
FORD T. R. PITT,
WATSON T. F.
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
international endodontic journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.988
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1365-2591
pISSN - 0143-2885
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2591.1993.tb00562.x
Subject(s) - glass ionomer cement , cement , materials science , seal (emblem) , composite material , dentistry , medicine , art , visual arts
Summary A light‐cured glass ionomer cement was investigated as a retrograde root seal, without a retrograde cavity. This was compared with the material used in a retrograde cavity, and with a conventional glass ionomer cement, as a seal. The adaptation and sealing ability of the test materials were assessed using a confocal optical microscope with a fluorescent dye. The root canals of 40 extracted human single‐rooted teeth were prepared and filled with gutta‐percha and sealer. All the teeth were subsequently apicected, then divided into four equal groups. In one group, a retrograde cavity was prepared, and the light‐cured glass ionomer cement was placed as a retrograde root filling. No retrograde cavities were prepared in the three remaining groups. The light‐cured glass ionomer cement was applied directly onto the apicected root face. Two different thicknesses of light‐cured glass ionomer cement were tested, a thin layer (≈1 mm) in one group, and a thicker layer (<1 mm) in another group. A conventional glass ionomer cement was used in the last group, and applied directly onto the root face in a single thickness (≈1 mm). In the group where the light‐cured glass ionomer cement was used in a retrograde cavity, the material was often well adapted to one cavity wall, but gaps were found on the opposite wall. The light‐cured and conventional glass ionomer cement retrograde root seals were well adapted to the root face, regardless of the thickness of material used. The thinly applied (≈1 mm) light‐cured glass ionomer cement retrograde root seals permitted the least leakage. This was significantly less than the light‐cured glass ionomer cement used with a retrograde cavity ( P > 0.001). The greatest extent of dye penetration was found with the thick (< 1 mm) light‐cured and conventional glass ionomer cement (≈1 mm) root seals; the differences between these were not significant. The light‐cured glass ionomer cement was only suitable as a retrograde root seal when a thin layer (≈1 mm) was used.