| Literature DB >> 33353918 |
Sudha Yadav1, Ruchika Roongta Nawal1, Sarika Chaudhry1, Sangeeta Talwar1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the quality of root canal filling of C Point, GuttaCore and lateral compaction using confocal laser scanning microscopy.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33353918 PMCID: PMC7881386 DOI: 10.14744/eej.2020.62534
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Endod J ISSN: 2548-0839
Values for interfacial adaptation (IA), PGFA, PSFA and POV at 2, 5 and 8 mm sections
| 2 mm | 5 mm | 8 mm | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | IA | PGFA | PSFA | POV | IA | PGFA | PSFA | POV | IA | PGFA | PSFA | POV |
| Lateral compaction | 0a | 88.25a | 9.35a | 0a | 7.15a | 67.3a | 28.25a | 1.05a | 7.9a | 70.9a | 26.15a | 1.85a |
| (0-24) | (49.5- 96.1) | (3.7-43.3) | (0-13.2) | (0-26.4) | (41.9-82.8) | (17.2-45.8) | (0-17.2) | (0-23.8) | (50.1-89.6) | (10.4-36.9) | (0-25.6) | |
| GC | 0a | 93.2b | 6.8a | 0a | 1.45a | 81.25b | 17.25b | 0a | 2.95a | 82.3b | 16.4b | 0a |
| (0-16.5) | (64.9-98.5) | (1.5-33.8) | (0-5.9) | (0-20.6) | (61.1-92.4) | (7.6-31.5) | (0-10.5) | (0-19.4) | (65.4-93.8) | (6.2-27.1) | (0-10.9) | |
| C Point | 0a | 94.2b | 5.55a | 0a | 1.25a | 77.85c | 21.05c | 0.5a | 2.2a | 78.4b | 18.85c | 0.6a |
| (0-10.3) | (76.2-97.6) | (1.3-23.6) | (0-8.1) | (0-20.7) | (53.2-89.4) | (10.6-37.4) | (0-13.6) | (0-21.7) | (56.2-92.6) | (7.4-27.9) | (0-17.8) | |
| P value | 0.061 | 0.006 | 0.038 | 0.009 | 0.281 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.038 | 0.075 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.204 |
Values represent median and range. Different letter in each column indicates statistically significant differences (P<0.05). IA: Interfacial adaptation, PGFA: Percentages of gutta-percha filled area, PSFA: Percentages of sealer filled area, POV: Percentages of voids
Figure 1Representative CLSM images taken at 2, 5 and 8 mm levels in lateral compaction group. The presence of accessory cones can be easily appreciated in 5 and 8 mm level sections (marked with arrow)
Figure 2Representative CLSM images taken at 2, 5 and 8 mm levels in Guttacore group. Dense filling with minimum sealer thickness can be noted at all the levels
Figure 3Representative CLSM images taken at 2, 5 and 8 mm levels in C Point group
Figure 4(a) Voids can be appreciated within the sealer mass (circled area). (b) Presence of gap at sealer-dentine junction (bracket) is clearly distinguishable. (c) Unclean debris filled area (circled) in the root canal cross section which can be readily appreciated in CLSM images
Figure 5(a) The two layers of C point i.e central core (CC) and outer hydrogel (OH) are clearly distinguishable in CLSM images. Non uniform expansion of OH layer is also evident. One accidental finding was the presence of tear/rupture (T) seen in OH layer. (b) Delamination between the OH layer and sealer layer can be observed