Long-term sealing ability of GuttaFlow versus Ah Plus using different obturation techniques

Area of Science:

• Endodontics
• Dental Materials Science
• Restorative Dentistry

Background:

• Effective root canal sealing is crucial for endodontic treatment success.
• GuttaFlow® and AH Plus™ are commonly used root canal filling materials.
• Different obturation techniques may influence the long-term sealing ability of root canal filling materials.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the long-term apical and coronal sealing ability of GuttaFlow®.
• To evaluate GuttaFlow®'s performance with lateral compaction and single cone obturation techniques.
• To compare GuttaFlow® with AH Plus™ in terms of sealing efficacy over time.

Main Methods:

• Three hundred prepared teeth were divided into experimental groups (n=10).
• Evaluated apical and coronal leakage at 3, 30, and 120 days.
• Tested combinations of gutta-percha with AH Plus™ or GuttaFlow®, single cone with AH Plus™ or GuttaFlow®, and GuttaFlow® alone.

Main Results:

• No significant differences in leakage were found between GuttaFlow® with lateral compaction and GuttaFlow® with single cone techniques.
• GuttaFlow® used alone exhibited the highest leakage values at 30 and 120 days.
• AH Plus™ showed high coronal leakage after 120 days and apical leakage after 30 days compared to the silicone-based sealer.

Conclusions:

• GuttaFlow®, when combined with lateral compaction or single cone techniques, offers superior long-term apical and coronal sealing compared to AH Plus™.
• Using GuttaFlow® as a sole filling material results in inferior sealing.
• The choice of obturation technique significantly impacts the sealing effectiveness of root canal filling materials.