Comparative Evaluation of Three Different Obturation Methods in Filling Experimental Internal Resorptive Defects Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography – An In vitro Study

Aim: This in vitro study was conducted with an aim to compare the quality of obturation by measuring the percentage voids in artificial internal resorptive defects of root canals filled using Thermoplasticized gutta-percha (GP) with AH Plus sealer, GP with EndoSequence BC sealer, and GP with GuttaFlow2. Methodology: Sixty extracted human anterior teeth were selected and endodontically accessed. Biomechanical preparation was done using the ProTaper Universal rotary instruments. To create artificial internal resorptive cavities, roots were sectioned horizontally with a diamond disc, 7 mm from the apex. Semicircular cavities were created in each section around the periphery of the opening of the root canal using a round bur, following which the sections were recemented together. The prepared specimens were assigned to three groups by random allocation. Group I: 20 specimens obturated using thermoplasticized GP (Elements Obturation Unit, SybroEndo) with AH Plus sealer. Group II: 20 specimens obturated using GP with EndoSequence BC (Brasseller, USA) sealer Group III: 20 specimens obturated using GP with GuttaFlow 2(Coltene/Whaledent). After obturation, the specimens were examined using cone beam computed tomography. One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s multiple post hoc test were used for statistical analysis. Results: Quality of obturation in internal resorptive defects of root canals obturated with thermoplasticized GP with AH Plus sealer and GP with EndoSequence BC was inferior as compared with GP with Gutta Flow. Conclusion: GuttaFlow 2 with GP demonstrated superior obturation quality with fewer voids in artificial internal resorptive defects compared to thermoplasticized GP with AH Plus sealer and GP with EndoSequence BC sealer.