Brief Article
Copyright ©2013 Baishideng. All rights reserved.
World J Stomatol. May 20, 2013; 2(2): 30-34
Published online May 20, 2013. doi: 10.5321/wjs.v2.i2.30
Quantitative scintigraphic analysis of the apical seal in Thermafil/Topseal and RealSeal 1/Realseal filled root canals
Manuel Marques Ferreira, Margarida Abrantes, Eunice Virgínia Carrilho, Maria Filomena Botelho
Manuel Marques Ferreira, Eunice Virgínia Carrilho, Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000 Coimbra, Portugal
Margarida Abrantes, Maria Filomena Botelho, Department of Biophysics and Biomathematics, IBILI-Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, 3000 Coimbra, Portugal
Author contributions: All authors contributed equally to this work.
Correspondence to: Dr. Manuel Marques Ferreira, Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Av. Bissaya Barreto, Blocos de Celas, 3000 Coimbra, Portugal. m.mferreira@netcabo.pt
Telephone: +351-239484183 Fax: +351-239834616
Received: September 24, 2012
Revised: December 27, 2012
Accepted: January 5, 2013
Published online: May 20, 2013
Abstract

AIM: To investigate the microleakage of two different root canal obturation systems, using the nuclear medicine approach.

METHODS: Twenty-six single-rooted extracted teeth were selected. The crowns were sectioned to obtain 15-mm long root segments and each tooth was prepared using rotary ProFile® instruments. The roots were divided into 2 experimental groups using RealSeal 1 and RealSeal sealer or Thermafil and TopSeal sealer as well as two control groups. On the 7th and the 28th day the apices were submersed in a solution of 99mTc-Pertechnetate during 3 h. The radioactivity was counted using a γ camera.

RESULTS: The present study showed that none of the root canal-filled teeth was leakage free. The statistical analyses were made using Kruskal-Wallis and statistical significance was assessed using α = 0.05. Although apical leakage measured in counts per minute (cpm) in the Thermafil/TopSeal group was lower than in the RealSeal/RealSeal group (363 916 ± 180 707.7 cpm vs 533 427 ± 414 020.6 cpm) on 7th day and (1 678 200 ± 567 217.4 cpm vs 2 240 518 ± 383 356.7 cpm) on 28th day, there was no statistical difference (P > 0.05). In the Thermafil/TopSeal group and RealSeal 1/RealSeal group it was found that over time, the number of counts increased between 7 d and 28 d (363 916 ± 180 707.7 cpm vs 1 678 200 ± 567 217.4 cpm) and (533 427 ± 414 020.6 cpm vs 2 240 518 ± 383 356.7 cpm), respectively, with statistically significant differences (Thermafil/TopSeal group, P = 0.015 and RealSeal 1/RealSeal group, P = 0.036).

CONCLUSION: Both carrier-based Realseal 1 and Thermafil techniques showed a similar sealing effect, but none of the materials was leakage free.

Keywords: Microleakage, Nuclear medicine, Obturation, Thermafil, Realseal