Evaluating the penetration, interfacial adaptation, and push-out bond strength of four bioceramic-based root canal sealers.

backgroundThis study evaluated the penetration, interfacial adaptation, and push-out bond strength of four bioceramic-based root canal sealers (iRoot SP, Well-Root ST, C-Root SP, and KP-Root SP).

methodsA total of ninety mandibular first premolar teeth were used in this study, with eighty teeth randomly divided into eight groups (n = 10). Four groups were designated for sealer penetration analysis, using each of the four sealers mentioned above mixed with 0.1% rhodamine B and applied using the single-cone technique. Horizontal root sections were prepared at 2 mm (apical), 5 mm (middle), and 8 mm (coronal) from the root apex, resulting in a total of 120 slices. Penetration was evaluated using confocal laser scanning microscopy. The other four groups were used for marginal adaptation analysis, with the same sealers applied without rhodamine B, and adaptation was assessed using scanning electron microscopy on sections prepared at the same depths. The remaining ten teeth were used to evaluate push-out bond strength, with 30 dental slices prepared from the middle third, each drilled with four 1 mm diameter holes and randomly filled with one of the four sealers; bond strength was measured using a universal testing machine.

resultsThere was no statistically significant difference in the depth and circumference of dentin tubule penetration between different materials (P > 0.05). However, the coronal third was significantly higher than the apical third (P < 0.001). For iRoot SP, the percentage of dentin tubule penetration circumference at the middle third was significantly higher than that at the apical third (P < 0.05). Additionally, Well-Root ST demonstrated superior adaptability for interfacial adaptation than C-Root SP at all the sites (P < 0.05). However, the adaptability of iRoot SP was superior to C-Root SP at the coronal and middle thirds (P < 0.05). Moreover, the push-out bond strength conformed to the following order: Well-Root ST > iRoot SP > KP-Root SP > C-Root SP, with notable variations (P < 0.05).

conclusionThe Well-Root ST sealer demonstrated the best interface adaptation and push-out bonding strength, as well as iRoot SP showed better permeability.