Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions| Reviewers

Login 
  Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Users Online: 600    
     
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 377-382

A comparison of apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH plus: An in vitro study


1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Bharti Vidyapeeth Dental College, Sangli, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, K. M. Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University, Piparia, Vadodara, Gujarat, India
3 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Tatyasaheb Kore Dental College and Research Centre, Kolhapur, Maharashtra, India
4 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vasantdada Patil Dental College and Hospital, Kawalapur, Sangli, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Vishnu P. S. Rathore
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, K. M. Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University, Piparia, Vadodara – 390 019, Gujrat
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2231-0762.186794

Rights and Permissions

Aims: The present study aimed to compare apical sealing ability between GuttaFlow and AH Plus. Materials and Method: Eighty extracted human maxillary anterior teeth with fully formed apex and straight root were collected for this study. The root canals were cleaned and shaped using a standard step back preparation to size 60# master apical file at the established working length and divided into four groups: Group 1, GuttaFlow sealer with gutta-percha; Group 2, AH Plus sealer with gutta-percha; Group 3, positive control group (Teeth were instrumented and left without obturation); Group 4, negative control group (Teeth were totally coated with nail varnish) Dye leakage was carried out. Statistical analysis was done using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software and Student's unpaired t-test. Results: The GuttaFlow group had a mean leakage of 1.38 mm whereas AH Plus had a mean of 1.425 mm. The standard deviation of GuttaFlow and AH Plus were 0.3861 and 0.3226, respectively. Student's unpaired t-test disclosed no significant difference (P < 0.05) between the groups. Conclusion: None of the sealers used in the study could completely seal the apical foramen to have a fluid-tight seal. GuttaFlow and AH Plus showed no statistically significant difference in microleakage; the better result was shown by GuttaFlow.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1531    
    Printed19    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded160    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal