Journal of Endodontics
Volume 19, Issue 10 , Pages 508-511 , October 1993

An electrochemical study of the sealing ability of different retrofilling materials

  • Hatem A. Alhadainy, BDS, MSD

      Affiliations

    • Dr. Alhadainy is a graduate research associate. Division of Endodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee, Memphis, Memphis, TN.
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress requests for reprints to Dr. Hatem Alhadainy. Division of Endodontics. College of Dentistry, University of Tennessee, Memphis, 875 Union Ave., Memphis, TN 38163.
    • ,
  • Hussien Y. Elsaed, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Dr. Elsaed is professor of restorative dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Tanta, Egypt.
    • ,
  • Yehia M. Elbaghdady, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Dr. Elbaghadady is professor of endodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Tanta, Tanta, Egypt.

References 

  1. Hirsch JM, Mhlstrom U, Henrikson PA, Peterson LE. Periapical surgery. Int J Oral Surg. 1979;8:173–185
  2. Taylor RG, Bump R. Endodontic considerations associated with periapical surgery. Oral Surg. 1984;58:450–455
  3. Jacobson SM, VonFraunhofer JA. The investigation of microleakage in the root canal therapy. Oral Surg. 1976;42:817–823
  4. Delivanis PD, Chapman KA. Comparison and reliability of technique for measuring leakage and marginal penetration. Oral Surg. 1982;53:410–416
  5. Abdal AK, Retief DH. The apical seal via retrosurgical approach. I. A preliminary study. Oral Surg. 1982;53:614–621
  6. Marcott LR, Dowson J, Rowe NH. Apical healing with retrofilling materials amalgam and gutta-percha. J Endodon. 1975;1:63–65
  7. Beagrie GS, Main JH, Smith DC. Inflammatory reaction evoked by zinc polycarboxylate and zinc eugenol cements. A comparison. Br Dent J. 1972;132:351–357
  8. Zetterqvist L, Anneroth G, Nordenram A. Glass ionomer cement as retrofilling material. An experimental investigation in monkeys. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1987;16:459–467
  9. Zetterqvist L, Anneroth G, Danin J, Roding K. Microleakage of retrofilling, a comparative investigation between amalgam and glass ionomer cement in vitro. Int Endod J. 1988;21:1–8
  10. Oslon AK, MacPherson MG, Hartwell GR, Weller RN, Kulild JC. An in vitro evaluation of injectable thermoplastsized gutta-percha, glass ionomer, and amalgam when used as retrofilling materials. J Endodon. 1990;16:361–364
  11. King KT, Anderson RW, Pashley DH, Pantera EA. Longitudinal evaluation of the seal of endodontic retrofillings. J Endodon. 1990;16:307–310
  12. Aboush YE, Jenken BG. An evaluation of the bonding of glass ionomer to dentin and enamel. Br Dent J. 1986;161:179–184
  13. Kawahara H, Imanishi Y, Oshima H. Biological evaluation of glass ionomer cement. J Dent Res. 1979;1080–1086
  14. Tanzilli JP, Raphael D, Moodnik RM. A comparison of the marginal adaptation of retrograde technique. A scanning electron microscopic study. Oral Surg. 1980;50:74–80
  15. Kaplan SD, Tanzilli JP, Raphael D, Moodnik RM. A comparison of the marginal leakage of retrograde techniques. Oral Surg. 1982;54:583–585
  16. Parry GN, D'Anton EW, Madden RM. Sealing quality of polycarboxylate cement when compared to amalgam as retrofilling materials. Oral Surg. 1976;42:109–116
  17. Shani J, Friedman S, Stabholz A. A radionuclidic model for evaluating sealability of retrograde filling materials. Int J Nucl Med Biol. 1984;11:46–52
  18. Smith GA, Wilson NH, Combe EC. Microleakage of conventional and temary amalgam restoration. In vitro study. Br Dent J. 1978;144:69–73

PII: S0099-2399(06)81492-5

doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81492-5

Journal of Endodontics
Volume 19, Issue 10 , Pages 508-511 , October 1993

Article Tools