الفهرس 
Introduction.Only 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 78 |  |  |
| | | from | 78 | | |
Abstract
Choosing an endodontic sealer for clinical use is a decision that contributes to the long-term success of NSRCT.
The long-term success of endodontic therapies relies on complete filling after root canal obturation. Microleakage is one of the significant causes for endodontic failure, which occurs due to poor contacts between the gutta-percha and the seal-er, the sealer and the dentin, or through voids within the sealer.
It is not easy to achieve a complete filling with the current root-filling materials used in the clinic, due to the dimensional changes and lack of adhesion from gut-ta-percha, which is also the reason to use endodontic sealers in combination of gutta-percha. Thus, the adaptability of a sealer to the dentin is the primary factor influencing microleakage and reinfection of the root canal.
This study evaluated the sealing ability and push out bond strength of root Epoxy resin-based sealer (ADseal), Two bioceramic based sealers (CeraSeal bioceramic sealer) (Ceramoseal bioceramic sealer) and zinc-oxide based sealer (Zical). One of the recent epoxy resin-based sealer is ADseal, with excellent chemical, physical properties and sealing ability. These characteristics are responsible for the superiority of this sealer over the other epoxy resin-based sealers.
This study established on 64 extracted sound human single rooted premolars teeth with straight roots and single root canal were collected from the outpatient clinic in Oral Surgery department at Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University. By inspection under magnification, teeth with severe attrition, root caries, external root resorption or cracks were excluded.
The samples were classified into four main groups according to the obturation sealer:
• group A (n=16): ADseal sealer.
• group B (n=16): CeraSeal sealer.
• group C (n=16): Ceramoseal sealer.
• group D (n=16): Zinc-oxide sealer.
Each group were subdivided into two subgroups with 8 samples in each subgroup according to the method of evaluation
• Subgroup 1 (n=8): Sealing ability.
• Subgroup 2 (n=8): Push-out bond strength.
Our results revealed that:
• Regarding the sealing ability test, there was no significant difference among the different types of sealers at 1 day and at 1 week.
• Regarding intergroup comparison, there was no significant difference within the same group at 1 day and 1 week in ADSeal sealer group Ceraseal sealer group, Ceramoseal sealer Zical sealer group.
• Regarding Push out test, there was no significant difference at corneal section between ADSeal, Ceraseal, Ceramoseal, and Zical. There was no significant difference at middle section between ADSeal, Ceraseal, Ceramoseal, and Zical, and apical section between ADSeal, Ceraseal, Ceramoseal, and Zical group.
• There was no significant difference between corneal section, middle and apical section at ADSeal, Ceraseal, Ceramoseal, and Zical.