Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of two observational methods, scanning electron and confocal laser scanning microscopies, in the adhesive interface analysis of endodontic sealers to root dentine

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the accuracy of confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) during the analysis of the adhesive interface integrity and intratubular penetration of root canal sealers to radicular dentine.

Materials and methods

Twenty roots of human maxillary incisors were prepared and distributed into two groups (n = 10), followed by filling with gutta-percha and Endofill (G1) or AH Plus (G2). After 7 days, roots were sectioned and analyzed under CLSM and SEM. Score systems were used to evaluate the adhesive interface integrity (0–4) and sealer intratubular penetration (0–3). Data were submitted to Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney and Kendall correlation statistical tests (α = 5%).

Results

In the adhesive interface analysis, CLSM was similar (P = 0.157) to SEM for Endofill; however, the results were different for AH Plus (P = 0.029). Intratubular penetration had significant difference between observational methods for both sealers (P < 0.0001). Correlation analysis between SEM and CLSM for adhesive interface was moderate for Endofill and low for AH Plus. Intratubular penetration was low for both sealers.

Conclusion

SEM and CLSM analysis had similar results when sealers were compared, with a more homogeneous adhesive interface, and greater intratubular penetration for AH Plus. Comparison between observational methods demonstrated low positive correlation for adhesive interface and intratubular penetration analysis.

Clinical relevance

A proper interface formed between sealer and dentine is very important for final quality of root canal filling. Observational methods which allow an accurate analysis of this interface must be selected to assess such features.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baumgartner G, Zehnder M, Paque F (2007) Enterococcus faecalis type strain leakage through root canals filled with Gutta-Percha/AH plus or Resilon/Epiphany. J Endod 33(1):45–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.08.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Topçuoğlu HS, Arslan H, Akçay M, Saygili G, Çakici F, Topçuoğlu G (2014) The effect of medicaments used in endodontic regeneration technique on the dislocation resistance of mineral trioxide aggregate to root canal dentin. J Endod 40(12):2041–2044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.08.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Camilleri J (2015) Sealers and warm gutta-percha obturation techniques. J Endod 41(1):72–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.06.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Moinzadeh AT, Zerbst W, Boutsioukis C, Shemesh H, Zaslansky P (2015) Porosity distribution in root canals filled with gutta percha and calcium silicate cement. Dent Mater 31(9):1100–1108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.06.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Biggs S, Knowles K, Ibarrola J, Pashley DH (2006) An in vitro assessment of the sealing ability of resilon/epiphany using fluid filtration. J Endod 32(8):759–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.08.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pereira RD, Brito-Júnior M, Leoni GB, Estrela C, de Sousa-Neto MD (2017) Evaluation of bond strength in single-cone fillings of canals with different cross-sections. Int Endod J 50(2):177–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12607

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Teixeira CS, Silva-Sousa YC, Sousa-Neto MD (2008) Effects of light exposure time on composite resin hardness after root reinforcement using translucent fibre post. J Dent 36(7):520–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2008.03.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Generali L, Cavani F, Serena V, Pettenati C, Righi E, Bertoldi C (2017) Effect of different irrigation systems on sealer penetration into dentinal tubules. J Endod 43(4):652–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.12.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Toledano M, Sauro S, Cabello I, Watson T, Osorio R (2013) A Zn-doped etch-and-rinse adhesive may improve the mechanical properties and the integrity at the bonded-dentin interface. Dent Mater 29(8):142–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2013.04.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Priyadarshini BM, Selvan ST, TB L, Xie H, Neo J, Fawzy AS (2016) Chlorhexidine nanocapsule drug delivery approach to the resin-dentin interface. J Dent Res 95(9):1065–1072. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034516656135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Eltair M, Pitchika V, Hickel R, Kühnisch J, Diegritz C (2017) Evaluation of the interface between gutta-percha and two types of sealers using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Clin Oral Investig. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2216-x

  12. Bitter K, Paris S, Mueller J, Neumann K, Kielbassa AM (2009) Correlation of scanning electron and confocal laser scanning microscopic analyses for visualization of dentin/adhesive interfaces in the root canal. J Adhes Dent 11(1):7–14. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a14703

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Teixeira CS, Alfredo E, Thomé LHC, Gariba Silva R, Silva-Sousa YTC, Sousa-Neto MD (2009) Adhesion of endodontic sealer to dentin and gutta percha: shear and push-out bond strength measurements and SEM analysis. J Appl Oral Sci 17(2):129–135. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572009000200011

  14. Bitter K, Paris S, Martus P, Schartner R, Kielbassa AMA (2004) Confocal laser scanning microscope investigation of different dental adhesives bonded to root canal dentine. Int Endod J 37(12):840–848. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00888.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ordinola-Zapata R, Bramante CM, Graeff MS, del Carpio Perochena A, Vivan RR, Camargo EJ, Garcia RB, Bernardineli N, Gutmann JL, de Moraes IG (2009) Depth and percentage of penetration of endodontic sealers into dentinal tubules after root canal obturation using a lateral compactation technique: a confocal scanning microscopy study. Oral Surg Oral Med, Oral Pathol, Oral Radiol Endod 108(3):450–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.04.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. D’Alpino PH, Pereira JC, Svezero NR, Rueggelerg FA, Pashley DH (2006) Use of fluorescent compounds in accessing bonded resin based restauration: a literature review. J Dent 34(9):623–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2005.12.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tedesco M, Felippe MC, Felippe WT, Alves AM, Bortoluzzi EA, Teixeira CS (2014) Adhesive interface and bond strength of endodontic sealers to root canal dentine after immersion in phosphate-buffered saline. Microsc Res Tech 77(12):1015–1022. https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.22430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Santini A, Miletic V (2008) Comparison of the hybrid layer formed by Silorane adhesive, one-step self-etch, etch, and rinse systems using confocal micro-Raman spectroscopy and SEM. J Dent 36(9):683–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2008.04.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Caneppele TM, Rocha Gomes Torres C, Bresciani E (2015) Analysis of the color and fluorescence alterations of enamel and dentin treated with hydrogen peroxide. Braz Dent J 26(5):514–518. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201300249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee YK (2015) Fluorescence properties of human teeth and dental calculus for clinical applications. J Biomed Opt 20(4):040901. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JBO.20.4.040901

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yoshiyama M, Carvalho R, Sano H, Horner J, Brewer PD, Pashley DH (1995) Interfacial morphology and strength of bonds made to superficial versus deep dentin. Am J Dent 8(6):297–302

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Teixeira CS, Felippe MC, Felippe WT (2005) The effect of application time of EDTA and NaOCl on intracanal smear layer removal: an SEM analysis. Int Endod J 38(5):285–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.00930.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Leal F, Simão RA, Fidel SR, Fidel RA, do Prado M (2015) Effect of final irrigation protocols on push-out bond strength of an epoxy resin root canal sealer to dentin. Aust Endod J 41(3):135–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Saber SE, El-Askary FS (2009) The outcome of immediate or delayed application of a single-step self-etch adhesive to coronal dentin following the application of different endodontic irrigants. Eur J Dent 3(2):83–89

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Stelzer R, Schaller HG, Gernhardt CR (2014) Push-out bond strength of RealSeal SE and AH plus after using different irrigation solutions. J Endod 40(10):1654–1657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.05.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Collares FM, Portella FF, Rodrigues SB, Celeste RK, Leitune VC, Samuel SM (2016) The influence of methodological variables on the push-out resistance to dislodgement of root filling materials: a meta-regression analysis. Int Endod J 49(9):836–849. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Weis MV, Parashos P, Messer HH (2004) Effect of obturation technique on sealer cement thickness and dentinal tubule penetration. Int Endod J 37(10):653–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00839.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Montoya C, Arango-Santander S, Peláez-Vargas A, Arola D, Ossa EA (2015) Effect of aging on the microstructure, hardness and chemical composition of dentin. Arch Oral Biol 60(12):1811–1820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2015.10.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. McKinlay KJ, Allison FJ, Scotchford CA, Grant DM, Oliver JM, King JR, Wood JV, Brown PD (2004) Comparison of environmental scanning electron microscopy with high vacuum scanning electron microscopy as applied to the assessment of cell morphology. J Biomed Mater Res A 1(2):359–366. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.30011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Haragushiku GA, Teixeira CS, Furuse AY, Sousa YT, De SN, Silva RG (2012) Analysis of the interface and bond strength of resin-based endodontic cements to root dentin. Microsc Res Tech 75(5):655–661. https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.21107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Marín-Bauza GA, Silva-Sousa YT, da Cunha SA, Rached-Junior FJ, Bonetti-Filho I, Sousa-Neto MD, Miranda CE (2012) Physicochemical properties of endodontic sealers of different bases. J Appl Oral Sci 20(4):455–461. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572012000400011

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Khedmat S, Momen-Heravi F, Pishvaei M (2013) A comparison of viscoelastic properties of three root canal sealers. J Dent (Tehran) 10(2):147–154

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Biocel group (Federal University of Paraná), which kindly performed the CLSM analysis, and the Central Laboratory of Microscopy (LCME, Federal University of Santa Catarina) for SEM Analysis.

Funding

This study was financially supported by the “Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e Inovação do Estado de Santa Catarina - FAPESC” (grant # TO-10027/2012-7).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Dentistry - Endodontics Division, Health Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Campus João David Ferreira Lima, Trindade, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, 88040-900, Brazil

    Maybell Tedesco, Marcelo Carvalho Chain, Eduardo Antunes Bortoluzzi, Lucas da Fonseca Roberti Garcia, Ana Maria Hecke Alves & Cleonice Silveira Teixeira

Authors
  1. Maybell Tedesco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marcelo Carvalho Chain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eduardo Antunes Bortoluzzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lucas da Fonseca Roberti Garcia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ana Maria Hecke Alves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Cleonice Silveira Teixeira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cleonice Silveira Teixeira.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

The Human Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Santa Catarina has approved this study (Protocol No 42929015.0.0000.0121).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tedesco, M., Chain, M.C., Bortoluzzi, E.A. et al. Comparison of two observational methods, scanning electron and confocal laser scanning microscopies, in the adhesive interface analysis of endodontic sealers to root dentine. Clin Oral Invest 22, 2353–2361 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2336-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2336-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation