Comparison of Gap Volume after Retrofilling Using 4 Different Filling Materials: Evaluation by Micro-computed Tomography.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the gap volume between dentin and root-end filling materials.

METHODS

Four root-end filling materials were compared in the present study: ProRoot MTA (PRM; Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK), MTA Angelus (MAG; Angelus, Londrina, Brazil), EndoCem MTA (ECM; Maruchi, Wonju, Korea), and RetroMTA (RTM; BioMTA, Seoul, Korea). Forty-eight single-rooted, extracted human teeth were instrumented with nickel-titanium instruments and oburated with gutta-percha. The apical 3 mm of the root tip was resected, and root-end preparation was performed with a diamond bur. The root-end cavity was filled with the experimental filling materials for the 4 designated groups (n = 10). Then, the samples were scanned with micro-computed tomographic (micro-CT) imaging. Three-dimensional images of the samples were reconstructed, and the volume of the gap between the tooth surface (dentinal wall) and the root-end filling materials was measured. The percentage volume of the gap between the tooth structure and the root-end filling material (VG%) was calculated. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests at a significance level of 95%.

RESULTS

The median VG% values for the PRM, MAG, ECM, and RTM groups were 0.00472, 0.00134, 0.00014, and 0.00071, respectively. The ProRoot MTA group showed the greatest gap volume percentage among the experimental groups with a significant statistical difference (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

From the micro-CT analysis, ProRoot MTA had a greater gap volume percentage than other root-end filling materials.