Avaliação in vitro da microinfiltração coronária em materiais restauradores temporários em dente obturados com sealer 26 e ah plus

Abstract

The quality of the filling is used as one of the main parameters to determine the success of endodontic treatment. In addition, proper coronal sealing between sessions aims to prevent re-infection of endodontic spaces and consequent treatment failure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the coronal microleakage of four temporary sealers, Coltosol, IRM, Bioplic and Protemp 4, on teeth filled with two different endodontic cements: Sealer 26 and AH Plus. One hundred and seventy bovine teeth were selected and stored in a 0.1% thymol solution until use. The samples were divided into 17 groups, varying in the type of cement, the presence of 70% ethanol cleaning and the temporary sealant. All the teeth had their roots cut 4mm below the cemento-amel boundary, then the root canal was exposed and closed with acrylic resin. After this, the pulp chamber was opened and two layers of nail enamel and ethyl cyanocrylate were applied to the entire outer surface of the tooth. After carrying out the protocol for each group, the teeth were stored in an oven for 48 hours. They were then thermocycled (125 cycles from 5° to 55°C) and immersed in an aqueous solution of 2% methylene blue for 24 hours. After this period, the teeth were cleaned, cut longitudinally in the buccal-lingual direction and the infiltration was measured using a digital caliper on both sides. Statistically, the test of variance between the factors is significant and shows that the three factors studied (type of cement, cleaning of the pulp chamber and type of dressing) determine differences in the mean outcome. Therefore, the results showed that Coltosol was the most efficient dressing and its best performance was associated with not cleaning the cavity and filling with AH Plus. It can therefore be concluded that the presence of the cements helped the retention mechanism of the materials, but cleaning the pulp chamber with 70% ethanol did not bring satisfactory results.