To compare and analyze the dentinal tubule penetration and sealing efficacy of three commercially available endodontic sealers.(AH Plus, CeraSeal and KP-Root SP). Subjects and methods Sixty extracted mandibular premolars with a single canal were utilized in this study which were extracted from patients aged between 20 and 30 years. Depending on the type of sealer used, the samples were divided into three groups (n=20 per group): Group I (AH Plus sealer), Group II (CeraSeal sealer), and Group III (KP-Root SP sealer). The sealing efficacy was evaluated using a stereomicroscope, while dentinal tubule penetration was analyzed through scanning electron microscopy. One-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey’s test were used to analyze the data. Results CeraSeal demonstrated the greatest dentinal tubule penetration and sealing efficacy, followed by KP-Root SP, with AH Plus sealer exhibiting the lowest performance. Conclusion Bioceramic sealers exhibit superior dentinal tubule penetration and sealing efficacy compared to the AH Plus sealer.

Aim:  In this research, we assessed the sealing performance of various root canal sealers in conjunction with diverse obturation methods Subjects and methods: We selected ninety human mandibular premolars with single roots. The instrumentation was carried out for all specimens using ProTaper Next rotary files until reaching a size of 40/0.06. Irrigation was done by applying 5 mL of 5.25% NaOCl between each instrument, followed by a final rinse of 5 mL of 17% EDTA for 1 minute. Subsequently, we flushed the canals with a generous amount of sterile distilled water. We randomly selected samples and categorized them into three primary groups (n=30) based on the sealer employed. Each primary group was subdivided into three subgroups (n=10) depending on the obturation technique employed. In the groups using bioceramic sealers (Group B, C), the canals were intentionally left partially moist to aid in the setting process, thereby mimicking real-world clinical scenarios. To ensure the sealer fully set, the teeth were kept in an environment with 100% humidity at 37°C for a week. Afterward, the roots were transversely sectioned using a precision linear saw. The cut sections were then examined using a Scanning Electron Microscope. Results: Gap distance is significantly higher in the AH Plus sealer group and lower in the Vertical compaction technique. Conclusion: Bioceramic sealers showed better adaption to dentin and vertical compaction obturation technique showed the best adaptation.

This study evaluated the biocompatibility of three different root canal sealers (CeraSeal, NeoSEALER Flo, and AH-Plus) by implanting them into the subcutaneous tissues of rats and analyzing the tissue response through histopathological and immunohistochemical methods.

Materials and Methods

Sixty male Calomys callosus (Rodentia, Cricetidae) rats were used. The sealers were placed in polyethylene tubes that were inserted into certain dorsal subdermal locations. After 3, 7, and 30 days, the implants were removed, fixed, and processed for microscopic inspection using a glycol methacrylate-embedding procedure.The descriptive analysis focused on fibrous capsule thickness, severity of the inflammatory response, presence of giant cells, and evidence of biomineralization.

Results

CeraSeal and the control group exhibited a milder inflammatory response compared to NeoSEALER Flo and AH-Plus. Additionally, the control group showed the thinnest fibrous capsule, followed by CeraSeal, while AH-Plus demonstrated the thickest capsule.

Conclusions

Within the limitations of this study, CeraSeal demonstrated superior biocompatibility compared to NeoSEALER Flo and AH-Plus sealers.