AIM: To evaluate the bond strength of a resin-based sealer (AH Plus) to root canal dentine after the removal of a zinc oxide-eugenol-based sealer (Endofill), using different retreatment techniques. METHODOLOGY: The root canals of sixty-four maxillary incisors were prepared with ProTaper and filled with Endofill/gutta-percha. After thermocycling, the roots were randomly assigned according to the retreatment technique (n = 16): (A) ProTaper, (B) ProTaper/xylol, (C) ultrasound and (D) ultrasound/xylol and according to whether an operating microscope (OM) was used or not (n = 8): GI- direct vision (DV) and GII- indirect through the OM. Eight additional roots were instrumented and filled with AH Plus/gutta-percha (control). Roots were sectioned to obtain 1-mm-thick slices. Slices were used in the push-out test and in confocal microscopy. Data were submitted to anova and Tukey test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The specimens filled under the OM (2.50 ± 0.90) had higher bond strength values of sealer to root canal walls (P < 0.05). The control group had superior mean adhesion values (4.75 ± 1.47) that were significantly different from the others (P < 0.05). Ultrasound/xylol (2.53 ± 1.00) was superior to ultrasound (2.23 ± 0.72) (P < 0.05), ProTaper (2.20 ± 0.69), ProTaper/Xylol (2.12 ± 0.65), which were similar (P > 0.05). Bond strength was different in all thirds (P < 0.05) and decreased in the following sequence: cervical (3.19 ± 1.18), middle (2.58 ± 1.21) and apical (1.87 ± 0.68). Confocal analysis revealed residues of Endofill in dentinal tubules when the removal protocol was carried out with ProTaper, but not from ultrasound combined with xylol. CONCLUSIONS: The OM was associated with higher bond strength values for filling material to root canals. The zinc oxide-eugenol-based sealer negatively affected the bond strength of AH Plus to root canal walls, regardless of the retreatment technique.
AIM: To evaluate the bond strength of a resin-based sealer (AH Plus) to root canal dentine after the removal of a zinc oxide-eugenol-based sealer (Endofill), using different retreatment techniques. METHODOLOGY: The root canals of sixty-four maxillary incisors were prepared with ProTaper and filled with Endofill/gutta-percha. After thermocycling, the roots were randomly assigned according to the retreatment technique (n = 16): (A) ProTaper, (B) ProTaper/xylol, (C) ultrasound and (D) ultrasound/xylol and according to whether an operating microscope (OM) was used or not (n = 8): GI- direct vision (DV) and GII- indirect through the OM. Eight additional roots were instrumented and filled with AH Plus/gutta-percha (control). Roots were sectioned to obtain 1-mm-thick slices. Slices were used in the push-out test and in confocal microscopy. Data were submitted to anova and Tukey test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The specimens filled under the OM (2.50 ± 0.90) had higher bond strength values of sealer to root canal walls (P < 0.05). The control group had superior mean adhesion values (4.75 ± 1.47) that were significantly different from the others (P < 0.05). Ultrasound/xylol (2.53 ± 1.00) was superior to ultrasound (2.23 ± 0.72) (P < 0.05), ProTaper (2.20 ± 0.69), ProTaper/Xylol (2.12 ± 0.65), which were similar (P > 0.05). Bond strength was different in all thirds (P < 0.05) and decreased in the following sequence: cervical (3.19 ± 1.18), middle (2.58 ± 1.21) and apical (1.87 ± 0.68). Confocal analysis revealed residues of Endofill in dentinal tubules when the removal protocol was carried out with ProTaper, but not from ultrasound combined with xylol. CONCLUSIONS: The OM was associated with higher bond strength values for filling material to root canals. The zinc oxide-eugenol-based sealer negatively affected the bond strength of AH Plus to root canal walls, regardless of the retreatment technique.