A Comparison of the Apical Sealing Efficacy Between Guttaflow Bioseal and Mineral Trioxide Aggregate as Root-End Filling Materials: An In Vitro Study

Aim The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of Guttaflow Bioseal (Coltene/Whaledent, Altstätten, Switzerland) in achieving an apical seal when utilized as a retrograde filling material in comparison to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA). Methods Twenty single-rooted single-canaled human teeth were randomly allocated into two equal groups according to the used retrograde filling materials: Guttaflow Bioseal in group I and MTA in group II. The crowns were sectioned, and the root canals were prepared with rotary files and obturated (single cone technique with a resin-based sealer). Following a 24-hour setting period, apex cutting and ultrasonic retrograde preparation were conducted. Following cavity preparation, the materials were applied into the retrograde cavity (Guttaflow Bioseal in group I and MTA in group II). Both groups were incubated at 37°C with 100% humidity for an additional 24 hours. Subsequently, the teeth were coated with two layers of varnish, leaving the apex exposed by 1 mm. The specimens were then desiccated and immersed in 2% methylene blue dye for 36 hours. Afterwards, the teeth were thoroughly rinsed, dried, and sectioned longitudinally. Dye leakage was examined under optical magnification, and the results were statistically analyzed utilizing the Mann-Whitney U test. Results The comparative evaluation revealed no statistically significant difference in microleakage between the two study groups (p-value > 0.05). The apical seal achieved with Guttaflow Bioseal was comparable to that achieved using MTA. Conclusions Guttaflow Bioseal demonstrated comparable low microleakage rates and an effective apical sealing capacity similar to that of MTA. Consequently, both materials are deemed suitable for use in retrograde filling applications. Guttaflow Bioseal is a viable option for use as a root-end filling material.