An in vitro comparison of adhesive systems to seal pulp chamber walls.
OBJECTIVE
To compare in vitro the sealing properties of five different dentine adhesive materials (Prime&Bond NT (PBNT); Prompt L-Pop (PLP); Clearfil SE Bond (CSEB); Scotchbond Multi Purpose Plus (SMPP); EBS-Multi (EBSM)) inside the pulp chamber.


METHODS
Seventy-five recently extracted human molar teeth were used. The roof of the pulp chambers and roots were removed under water cooling. Pulp tissue was removed, and the canal orifices were sealed. The pulp chambers were then treated with 5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) for 1 min. The teeth were randomly divided into five groups of 15 teeth each. Adhesive systems were applied to the pulp chamber walls according to the manufacturers' instructions. The samples were connected to Plexiglass plates, and a fluid filtration method was used for quantitative evaluation of leakage. Measurements of fluid movement were made at 2-min intervals for 8 min. The quality of seal of each specimen was measured immediately, after 24 h, 1 week and 1 month. The data were statistically analysed by repeated-measurements multivariate anova, Friedman test, Wilcoxon signed rank test, Kruskal-Wallis of one-way anova and Mann-Whitney U-tests. The pulp chamber wall with and without NaOCl and resin-dentine interfaces of specimens were observed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM).


RESULTS
The leakage values of the materials were significantly different at different measurement periods. In all groups, leakage values decreased with time (P < 0.05). PBNT and PLP had the least leakage during immediate measurements (P < 0.05). After 1 month, leakage of all adhesive systems was not significantly different (P < 0.05). SEM observation of pulp chamber walls demonstrated that the irregular dentine surface without smear layer was present in the nontreated group. However, NaOCl application removed the collagen fibrils leaving the dentine surface smooth. At resin-dentine interfaces of specimens, no hybridization zone was observed.


CONCLUSIONS
None of the materials had created a perfect seal to the pulp chamber walls. PBNT and PLP had better sealing over the short term, but over the long term, there were no differences between the materials.
Ozturk
B
B
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Selcuk University, Faculty of Denstistry, Konya, Turkey. bozturk@selcuk.edu.tr
Ozer
F
F
Belli
S
S
D000473:Alkanes; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D003763:Dental Leakage / Q000517:prevention & control*; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D006801:Humans; D008298:Maleates; D008422:Materials Testing; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D008963:Molar; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids; D019279:Resin Cements; D012387:Root Canal Filling Materials; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric
D000473:Alkanes; C438313:Clearfil SE Bond; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D008298:Maleates; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids; C425843:Prime and Bond NT; C408584:Prompt L-Pop; D019279:Resin Cements; D012387:Root Canal Filling Materials; C425844:Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus; C115514:Tokuso Mac Bond