The thermoplastic techniques or single-cone technique on the quality of root canal filling with tricalcium silicate-based sealer: An integrative review.

Background: The filling of the root canal system (RCS) is an important step in endodontic treatment and aims to obtain a three-dimensional sealing of the root canal spaces to prevent bacterial contamination. For this, the selection of an appropriate sealer must be performed synchronously with the choice of the root canal filling technique. This study aims, through an integrative review, to evaluate the quality of root canal filling by comparing thermoplastic and single-cone (SC) techniques. Material and Methods: The Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Virtual Health Library (VHL) databases were used to find articles published until November 2021. The eligibility criteria comprised articles that evaluating the quality of root canal filling comparing thermoplastic techniques with the SC technique using tricalcium silicate-based sealer. Studies that evaluated primary teeth, endodontic retreatment or perforations, different outcomes, and studies that considered artificial teeth or different sealer and material for obturation of different techniques were excluded. For articles that were not available for access, an additional contact with authors were considered. A total of 1699 articles were found. After duplicate removal, the title and abstract of 828 articles were screened. Sixteen articles were considered for full-text analysis, but only ten articles met the eligibility criteria. Data extracted from the studies were discussed and tabulated to allow the comparison of desired factors. Results: Concerning the formation of gaps/voids, the thermoplastic techniques showed better results than the SC technique in 3 articles. On the other hand, 2 articles reported no statistical difference between the tested techniques. In addition, about the penetration of tricalcium silicate-based sealer in the dentinal tubules, of the 5 articles selected, in 4 there was no significant difference between the tested techniques and only one study showed better penetration of the sealer when using thermoplastic techniques. Conclusions: The thermoplastic technique was better in most selected studies regarding gaps and voids, but regarding the penetration of the sealer into the tubules, both techniques were effective.