Penetration of Three Endodontic Sealers in Simulated Lateral Canals during the Lateral Condensation Technique: An In...

This study aimed to compare the penetration depths of AH Plus, BioRoot RCS, and GuttaFlow 2 into simulated lateral canals when used with the cold gutta-percha lateral compaction technique.

Twelve resin training blocks (4 canals perch each resin block) were used. Each primary artificial canal had two lateral canals (apical and coronal). The main canals were instrumented with WaveOne Gold and irrigated with distilled water. The resin blocks were divided into three groups (N = 4 each/16 artificial canals), according to the type of root canal sealer; Group I: AH Plus, Group II: BioRoot RCS, and Group III: GuttaFlow 2. All canals were obturated with the cold lateral condensation technique. The linear extension of each endodontic sealer into the apical and coronal lateral canals was measured using a digital stereomicroscope and measuring software. Data were statistically analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance. The percentages of filling of the lateral canals were calculated and statistically compared using the Mann-Whitney test.

The experimental sealers exhibited variable penetration depths into the lateral canals. All sealers showed significantly better penetration ability into the apical lateral canals than the coronal lateral canals (P < 0.05). AH Plus (3.184 ± 0.012 mm/99.5%) and GuttaFlow 2 (3.176 ± 0.017 mm/99.25%) were significantly better than BioRoot RCS (3.096 ± 0.026 mm/96.75%) in filling the apical lateral canals (P < 0.05). BioRoot RCS was the best sealer to fill coronal lateral canals (3.322 ± 0.085 mm/83.05%).

During the lateral condensation technique, the filling of the lateral canals is affected by the type of root canal sealer and the location of the lateral canals All the sealers tested have a good ability to fill the apical lateral, while BioRoot RCS was effective in filling both the coronal and apical lateral canals.