Comparison of compaction techniques for filling isthmuses using Biodentine in mandibular molars.

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the filling volume and surface area of Biodentine placed in mandibular molar isthmuses using three different compaction techniques (manual, ultrasonic, and sonic endomotor system).

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

Thirty resin mandibular molars with simulated apical-third isthmuses were randomly assigned to three compaction groups: manual, ultrasonic, and sonic endomotor system. Biodentine was compacted manually, with indirect ultrasonic activation, or using a sonic endomotor system. All specimens were scanned with high-resolution CBCT, and filling volumes and surface areas were quantified in 3D Slicer. Data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA.

RESULTS

While the sonic endomotor group showed the highest mean filling volume (8.11 ± 0.79 mm³), followed by the ultrasonic (7.93 ± 1.52 mm³) and manual (7.33 ± 0.80 mm³) groups, no statistically significant differences were found among the groups for either filling volume or surface area.

CONCLUSIONS

Under the conditions tested, no statistically significant differences were detected among the three compaction techniques in terms of filling volume or surface area. No superiority of ultrasonic or sonic activation over manual compaction was demonstrated within the resolution limits of this CBCT-based methodology.