Premium
Comparison of coronal bacterial leakage between immediate versus delayed post‐space preparation in root canals filled with Resilon/Epiphany
Author(s) -
Lyons W. W.,
Hartwell G. R.,
Stewart J. T.,
Reavley B.,
Appelstein C.,
Lafkowitz S.
Publication year - 2009
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.1365-2591.2008.01501.x
Subject(s) - epiphany , dentistry , materials science , significant difference , mathematics , medicine , art , visual arts , statistics
Aim To compare the sealing ability of Resilon/Epiphany™ after immediate versus delayed post‐space preparation using an ex vivo bacterial leakage model. Methodology Eighty extracted, decoronated, single‐rooted human maxillary teeth were randomly divided into two experimental groups and two control groups ( n = 20). Root canals were prepared in a standard manner with Sequence nickel–titanium rotary files to a final apical size of 50, .06 taper. Root canals in the experimental groups were filled with Resilon/Epiphany™ using a warm vertical compaction technique. In group 1, the post‐space was prepared immediately and in group 2 the post‐space was prepared 5 days later. Positive controls were filled with Resilon master cones without sealer. The negative controls were not obturated but the entire root surface including the orifices and foramina were sealed with fingernail polish. Leakage was examined at different time intervals using a dual‐chamber bacterial microleakage model. The marker microorganism used was Streptococcus mutans. Results All positive controls leaked within 3 days. All negative controls showed no leakage at each time interval. All experimental specimens leaked within 14 days. Statistical analysis showed that there was no difference in microleakage between the two experimental groups at each time interval. Conclusion In this ex vivo study, there was no significant difference between immediate and delayed post‐space preparation using Resilon/Epiphany™. Both groups failed to provide an adequate apical seal regardless of the timing of the post‐space preparation.