Influence of different biomechanical preparation auxiliary substances on the adhesion of AH Plus and Epiphany cements to intra-radicular dentine / Influência de diferentes substâncias auxiliares do preparo biomecânico na adesividade dos cimentos AH Plus e Epiphany à dentina intraradicular

AUTOR(ES)
DATA DE PUBLICAÇÃO

2008

RESUMO

The present study evaluated in vitro, using the push-out test, the bond strength of AH Plus and Epiphany sealers to root canal dentine treated with aqueous and gel auxiliary substances used biomechanical preparation. Roots of 100 canines were sectioned transversally at the cemento-enamel junction and at 4 mm below this section in the apical direction, providing dentine discs that were included in aluminum rings with acrylic resin. After the preparation of root canals with a tapered diamond bur, the specimens were assigned to 5 groups (n=20) according to the surface treatment: I. 1% NaOCl (control); II. 1% NaOCl/17%EDTA; III. 17% EDTA; IV. 24% EDTA (gel) and V. 2% Clorexidina (gel). Two specimens of each group were prepared for SEM analysis. Each group was subdivided into 2 (n=9) according to the tested sealer: AH Plus and Epiphany. The specimens were submitted to the push-out test in Universal Testing Machine and the results were transformed in MPa. Failure modes after test were analyzed at 25 X. Statistical analysis with ANOVA and Tukey test showed that AH Plus sealer had higher bond strength (8.742.75) than Epiphany (6.743.97) (p<0.05). Among the surface treatments, 1% NaOCl/17% EDTA lead to higher bond strength values (10.883.05), and were statistically different from the other treatments (p<0.05). Seventeen percent EDTA (8.751.75); 24% EDTA (gel) (7.48 3.48) and 2% chlorhexidine (gel) (7.893.41) showed intermediate values, were statistically similar among themselves (p>0.05) and 1% NaOCl presented the smallest values (3.70 0.86). The interaction between surface treatment and sealer, showed superior bond strength for AH Plus with 24% EDTA gel (10.331.10) and 2% chlorhexidine gel (10.742.01) and for Epiphany with 1%NaOCl/17%EDTA (12.762.93), statistically different from the other treatments (p<0.05). SEM showed that 24% EDTA gel and 2% chlorhexidine gel caused smear layer removal and opened dentinal tubules. Failure analysis showed the prevalence of cohesive-type, and mixed-type failure for AH Plus sealer, and adhesive-type and mixed-type for Epiphany sealer. It can be concluded that the bond strength of the sealers to root canal dentine was influenced by the surface treatment, and showed different performances.

ASSUNTO(S)

odontologia endodontics endodontia dentistry odontologia adhesion adesividade root canal canal radicular

ACESSO AO ARTIGO

Documentos Relacionados