근관 실러의 분류와 특성 비교

Abstract

The aim of this review was to compare calcium hydroxide-based root canal sealers with various contemporary commercial sealers especially leakage / solubility aspect. An extensive search of the endodontic literature through pubmed was made to identify publications related to calcium hydroxide-based sealers, epoxy resin-based sealers, methacrylate resin-based sealers and bioceramic-based sealers. 1. All sealers leak in long-term evaluation (>60 days). (except MTA sealers, because they do not have long-term [>120 days] evaluation data yet.) 2. Some sealers have better short-term sealing ability (<30 days). (but, the result could be reversed in long-term evaluation and meaningless after some period, because all sealers leak eventually.) 3. Regardless of the type of sealers, leakage increases over time. 4. A lot of endodontic treatment failure cases are because of re-infection through various route. 5. It is very important for the long-term survival of endodontically treated teeth that installation of full coverage-type final restoration as soon as possible after endodontical treatment. (further research is required to estabilish the sealing ability of luting cement or core material) It seems right to use sealers that have best bacterial sealing ability during those period (about 20 days) until the installation of full coverage-type final restoration right after the endodontical treatment finished. In that case, calcium hydroxide-based sealers are very effective and efficient.