Saudi Endodontic Journal

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year
: 2020  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 95--99

A comparative evaluation of sealing ability of three perforation repair materials using a field emission gun-scanning electron microscope


Saquib Mulla, Sharad Kamat, Santosh Hugar, Girish Nanjannawar, Nishita Kulkarni 
 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be) University Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Saquib Mulla
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be) University, Dental College and Hospital, Sangli-Miraj Road, Wanlesswadi, Sangli, Maharashtra
India

Introduction: The study aimed to assess the sealing ability of Biodentine™, ProRoot mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), and Super-EBA as furcation perforation repair materials using field emission gun-scanning electron microscope (FEG-SEM). Materials and Methods: Thirty-six extracted human permanent mandibular molar teeth were collected and cleaned. Standard access cavity preparation was made, and intentional perforation was created in each of the access cavity-prepared teeth using #12 round bur. The teeth were randomly divided into three groups each containing 12 teeth. The perforations were sealed as follows: Group A with Biodentine™, Group B with ProRoot MTA, and Group C with Super-EBA. The repair materials for all the three groups were evaluated for marginal adaptation using FEG-SEM. Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's honest significance test. Results: Quantitative FEG-SEM observations illustrated that the mean gap at the dentin–furcation repair material interface was as follows: Biodentine (3.01 ± 0.37 μm), ProRoot MTA (4.98 ± 0.68 μm), and Super-EBA (8.03 ± 0.68 μm). The difference between Biodentine™ and ProRoot MTA was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). Individually, Biodentine and ProRoot MTA showed statistically significant differences when compared to Super-EBA (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The sealing ability of ProRoot MTA and Biodentine™ as a repair material of furcation perforation was better than Super-EBA.


How to cite this article:
Mulla S, Kamat S, Hugar S, Nanjannawar G, Kulkarni N. A comparative evaluation of sealing ability of three perforation repair materials using a field emission gun-scanning electron microscope.Saudi Endod J 2020;10:95-99


How to cite this URL:
Mulla S, Kamat S, Hugar S, Nanjannawar G, Kulkarni N. A comparative evaluation of sealing ability of three perforation repair materials using a field emission gun-scanning electron microscope. Saudi Endod J [serial online] 2020 [cited 2020 Jun 6 ];10:95-99
Available from: http://www.saudiendodj.com/article.asp?issn=1658-5984;year=2020;volume=10;issue=2;spage=95;epage=99;aulast=Mulla;type=0