Comparison of apical sealing ability between bioceramic and zinc oxide eugenol-based sealer during root canal treatment, in vitro

Dedy Agoes Mahendra(1), Yora Nindita(2), Gustantyo Wahyu Wibowo(3), Gloria Fortuna(4*)

(1) Dentistry Study Program, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Central Java
(2) Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Central Java
(3) Dr. Kariadi General Hospital, Semarang, Central Java
(4) Dentistry Study Program, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Central Java
(*) Corresponding Author


Obturation with a sealer material that provides an adequate apical sealing ability is required to prevent endodontic treatment failure due to microleakage. However, there are no sealers that meet all the physical and chemical properties to be able to hermetically seal the root canal system to date. Various sealer materials have been developed in recent years including the use of bioceramic materials which are claimed to have excellent biocompatibility to tissues. This study aimed to compare the apical sealing ability of bioceramic-based and zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE)-based sealer in root canal treatment. A total of 27 extracted mandibular premolars were decoronated to the standard root length of 14 mm. The root canals were prepared with a crown-down technique using manual instrument to file F3 (30/.09). The samples were then divided into three groups: obturation with bioceramic-based sealer (n=9); ZOE-based sealer (n=9); and control group (n=9). Microleakage was measured using a dye penetration method with 1% methylene blue and observed under stereomicroscope at x20 magnification. The mean of the maximum penetration length from the lowest to the highest was found in the bioceramic-based sealer group (0.825 mm), the ZOE-based sealer group (3.850 mm), and the control group (4.444 mm). One-way ANOVA test showed a significant difference in the maximum penetration length between the three groups (p<0.05). The post hoc LSD test showed a significant difference in the maximum penetration length between the bioceramic-based and ZOE-based sealer groups (p<0.001). Obturation with bioceramic-based sealer provides a better apical sealing ability than that with ZOE-based sealer.


apical sealing ability; bioceramic-based sealer; maximum penetration length; microleakage; ZOE-based sealer

Full Text:



1. Hasnain M, Bansal P, Nikhil V. An in vitro comparative analysis of sealing ability of
bioceramic-based, methacrylate-based, and epoxy resin-based sealers. Endodontology.
2017; 29(2): 146-150. doi: 10.4103/endo.endo_101_16

2. Sikri V, Sidhu B, Sroa R, Setia P. Apical sealing ability of two novel root canal sealers: an exvivo study. J Int Clin Dent Res Organ. 2013; 5(1): 9-13. doi: 10.4103/2231-0754.134130

3. Kumar NS, Palanivelu A, Narayanan LL. Evaluation of the apical sealing ability and adaptation to the dentin of two resin-based Sealers: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent.
2013; 16(5): 449-453. doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.117518

4. Asawaworarit W, Pinyosopon T, Kijsamanmith K. Comparison of apical sealing ability of
bioceramic sealer and epoxy resin-based sealer using the fluid filtration technique and
scanning electron microscopy. J Dent Sci. 2020; 15(2): 186-192.
doi: 10.1016/ j.jds.2019.09.010

5. de Melo TV, Prado MC, Hirata R, Fidel SR, da Silva EJNL, Sassone LM. Improved sealing
ability promoted by calcium silicate-based root canal sealers. Braz J Oral Sci. 2018; 17:
1-8. doi: 10.20396/bjos.v17i0.8652651

6. Al-Haddad A, Aziz ZACA. Bioceramic-based root canal sealers: a review. Int J Biomater.
2016; 2016:10. doi: 10.1155/2016/9753210

7. Komabayashi T, Colmenar D, Cvach N, Bhat A, Primus C, Imai Y. Comprehensive review of
current endodontic sealers. Dent Mater J. 2020; 39(5): 703-720. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2019-288

8. Javidi M, Zarei M, Naghavi N, Mortazavi M, Nejat AH. Zinc oxide nano-particles as sealer
in endodontics and its sealing ability. Contemp Clin Dent. 2014; 5(1): 20-24.
doi: 10.4103/0976-237X.128656

9. Tour Savadkouhi S, Fazlyab M. Discoloration potential of endodontic sealers: a brief review.
Iran Endod J. 2016; 11(4): 250-254. doi: 10.22037/iej.2016.20

10. Rahaswanti LWA. Evaluasi keberhasilan pengisian saluran akar dengan sediaan
zinc oxide eugenol dan campuran calcium hydroxide dengan pasta iodoform. Intisari
Sains Medis. 2017;8(1):1-7.

11. Singh H, Markan S, Kaur M, Gupta G. Endodontic sealers: current concepts and
comparative analysis. Dent - Open J. 2015; 2(1): 32-37. doi: 10.17140/DOJ-2-107

12. Nikolić M, Gašić J, Mitić A, Popović J, Radovanović A, Barac R. Bone tissue response
to endomethasone implanted into the rat mandible. Acta Fac Medicae Naissensis. 2015;
32(2): 155-164. doi: 10.1515/afmnai-2015-0016

13. Jain P. Current Therapy in Endodontics. 1st ed. Oxford: John Willey & Sons, Inc.; 2016.

14. Nasseh A. The rise of bioceramics. Endod Prac [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2020 Mar 29]:21-25.
Available from: https://www.endoexperience. com/documents/bioceramicsealer.pdf.

15. Ayer A, Manandhar TR, Agrawal N, Vikram M, Suwal P. A comparative study of apical
microleakage of different root canal sealers by apical dye penetration. Bangladesh Journal of
Medical Science. 2017; 16(2): 219-224. doi: 10.3329/bjms.v16i2.23421

16. Aryanto M. Comparison of microleakage in root canals obturation using zinc oxideeugenol
and epoxy resin based sealer. ICEASD 2019. Apr 1-2. Indonesia; 2019.
doi: 10.4108/eai.1-4-2019.2287254

17. Al-thawab E, Khursheed I. A comparative evaluation of apical sealing ability between
AH26, MTA and pure portland cement: a vitro study. EC Dent Sci. 2019; 18(11): 11-18.
doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33483.75049

18. Cohen RG. Successful single-cone obturation. Insid Dent [Internet]. 2018 [cited
2020 Oct 6];14(3). Available from:

19. Sardar P, Abidi S, Iqbal W, Meo A, Jawaed N, Khan R. An in-vitro assessment of apical
sealing ability of resin based endodontic sealer at various time intervals. J Pak Dent
Assoc. 2015; 24(2): 75-80.

20. Sonmez I, Oba A, Sonmez D, Almaz M. In vitro evaluation of apical microleakage of a
new MTA-based sealer. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2012; 13(5): 252-255.
doi: 10.1007/BF03262880

21. Pawar S, Pujar M, Makandar S. Evaluation of the apical sealing ability of bioceramic
sealer, AH plus & epiphany: an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2014; 17(6): 579-582.
doi: 10.4103/0972-0707.144609

22. Lankar A, Mian RI, Mirza AJ, Siddiqui AA, Alam MK. A comparative evaluation of apical
sealability of various root canal sealers used in endodontics. Int Med J. 2018; 25(1): 39-41.

23. Ingle JI, Leif K. Bakland. Ingle’s Endodontics 6. Shelton, Connecticut: People’s Medical
Publishing House; 2008. 3-42.

24. Al Qassab SJ, Hadi D Al, Maniangant Luke A. Evaluation of three different obturation
techniques using three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography: in vitro study.
Dentistry. 2016; 6(12): 6-10. doi: 10.4172/2161-1122.1000403

25. Samadi F, Jaiswal J, Saha S, Garg N, Chowdhary S, Samadi F, Tripathi VP. A comparative evaluation of efficacy of different obturation techniques used in root canal treatment of anterior teeth: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2014; 7(1): 1-5.
doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1224

26. Varun K, Harpreet S, Rajinder B, Samrity P. Qualitative and quantitative comparative
evaluation of sealing ability of guttaflow, thermoplasticized gutta percha and lateral
compaction for root canal obturation: a cohort, controlled, ex-vivo study. J Oral Health Dent
Manag. 2013; 12(3):155-161.


Article Metrics

Abstract views : 1667 | views : 1583


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2021 Majalah Kedokteran Gigi Indonesia

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Currently, Majalah Kedokteran Gigi Indonesia indexed by:







 View My Stats

time web analytics