Evaluating the Sealing Potential of Different Materials for Perforation Repair: An In Vitro Study

Introduction: Root perforations pose a significant challenge in endodontic treatment, necessitating effective sealing materials to prevent microleakage and ensure long-term success.Advances in biocompatible materials have led to the introduction of various repair options, including injectable bioceramics and conventional powder-liquid systems.This study compared the performance of injectable materials (Bio-C Repair, Angelus, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil; and Guttaflow Bioseal, Coltène/Whaledent, Langenau, Germany) with the conventional powder-liquid system (Biodentine, Septodont S.A.S., Saint-Maur-des-Fossés, France) in minimizing microleakage in strip perforation repairs.The null hypothesis stated that there would be no significant difference in microleakage among the tested materials.Methods: An in vitro study was conducted using 50 extracted human molars.Root canals were prepared using rotary files, and strip perforations were created in the mesiobuccal canal using Gates-Glidden drills.The teeth were divided into five groups of 10 samples each, including three experimental groups (Biodentine, Bio-C Repair, and Guttaflow Bioseal) and two control groups.We assessed microleakage using the dye extraction method and Ultraviolet-Visible spectrophotometry at 550 nm.Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance and the Tukey post hoc test, with p < 0.05 considered significant.Results: Statistically significant differences in microleakage were observed among the groups.Among the experimental groups, Bio-C Repair exhibited the least microleakage, followed by Guttaflow Bioseal and Biodentine.Conclusion: The findings indicate that injectable root repair materials, such as Bio-C Repair and Guttaflow Bioseal, outperform the conventional powder-and-liquid system of Biodentine in minimizing microleakage.These materials present potential advantages for clinical applications requiring effective root repair.