Authors : Dr. Akshita Tak; Dr. Manu Bansal; Dr. Rashika Jauhari; Dr. Deepesh Boolchandani; Dr. Shubhanki Shrimal; Dr. Sathyam Bodike

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 7 - July

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/3y6c6n6v

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/3a3m39sp

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jul344

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract :  Results Statistically significant differences in dentinal tubule penetration were observed among all groups (p=0.001). MTA Fillapex demonstrated the highest penetration in the coronal (973.0±74.84 µm) and middle thirds (627.0±46.67 µm). Bio-C Sealer showed superior penetration in the apical third. AH Plus exhibited substantial coronal penetration but significantly lower apical penetration. Sealapex demonstrated moderate penetration, whereas Eugeseal exhibited the least penetration in all thirds.  Conclusion Bioceramic and MTA-based sealers demonstrated superior dentinal tubule penetration compared with conventional resin- and zinc oxide eugenol–based sealers. MTA Fillapex showed the greatest penetration in coronal and middle thirds, while Bio-C Sealer exhibited superior apical penetration. Enhanced dentinal tubule penetration may contribute to improved sealing ability and long-term endodontic success.

Keywords : Dentinal Tubule Penetration; Root Canal Sealer; Scanning Electron Microscopy; AH Plus; Bio-C Sealer; MTA Fillapex; Bioceramic Sealer; Endodontics.

References :

1. Kumar, Balwinder & Lalu, Aleena & Caushi, Senada & Devatha, Pranavi & Nagra, Taranjot & Sharma, Bhumika. (2026). ENDODONTIC IRRIGATION: FROM CURRENT CONCEPTS TO FUTURE INNOVATIONS. International Journal of Advanced Research. 14. 276-290. 10.21474/IJAR01/22743.
2. Tait C, Camilleri J, Blundell K. Non-surgical endodontics - obturation. Br Dent J. 2025 Apr;238(7):487-496. doi: 10.1038/s41415-025-8562-1. Epub 2025 Apr 11. PMID: 40217031; PMCID: PMC11991912.
3. Peters OA. Current challenges and concepts in the preparation of root canal systems: a review. J Endod. 2004;30(8):559-567. doi:10.1097/01.DON.0000129039.59003.9D
4. Haapasalo M, Orstavik D. In vitro infection and disinfection of dentinal tubules. J Dent Res. 1987;66(8):1375-1379. doi:10.1177/00220345870660081801.
5. Grossman LI. Physical properties of root canal cements. J Endod. 1976;2(6):166-175. doi:10.1016/S0099-2399(76)80047-5.
6. Khullar, Sanjana; Aggarwal, Anurag1; Chhina, Harleen1; Kaur, Tamanpreet1; Sharma, Mehak1; Bala, Deepak1. Sealer penetration in the dentinal tubules: A confocal laser scanning microscopy study. Endodontology 33(2):p 92-96, Apr–Jun 2021. | DOI: 10.4103/endo.endo_24_21.
7. Donnermeyer D, Bürklein S, Dammaschke T, Schäfer E. Endodontic sealers based on calcium silicates: a systematic review. Odontology. 2019;107(4):421-436. doi:10.1007/s10266-018-0400-3.
8. Viapiana R, Guerreiro-Tanomaru JM, Hungaro Duarte MA, Tanomaru-Filho M, Camilleri J. Chemical characterization and bioactivity of epoxy resin and Portland cement-based sealers with niobium and zirconium oxide radiopacifiers. Dent Mater. 2014;30(9):1005-1020. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2014.05.007
9. Kokkas AB, Boutsioukis C, Vassiliadis LP, Stavrianos CK. The influence of smear layer on dentinal tubule penetration depth by three different root canal sealers: an in vitro study. J Endod. 2004;30(2):100-102.
10. Ordinola-Zapata R, Bramante CM, Graeff MS, et al. Depth and percentage of penetration of endodontic sealers into dentinal tubules after root canal obturation using lateral compaction technique. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;108(3):450-457.
11. Akcay M, Arslan H, Durmus N, Cakir M. Dentinal tubule penetration of AH Plus, iRoot SP, MTA Fillapex after different final irrigation procedures. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31(2):289-294.
12. Cáceres C, Ballester RCA, Bortoluzzi EA, et al. Penetration and adaptation of Bio-C Sealer and AH Plus in dentinal tubules evaluated by CLSM and SEM. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25(6):3217-3225.
13. Desai S, Chandler N. Calcium hydroxide-based root canal sealers: a review. J Endod. 2009;35(4):475-480.
14. Ørstavik D. Materials used for root canal obturation: technical, biological and clinical testing. Endod Topics. 2005;12(1):25-38.
15. Mjör IA, Nordahl I. The density and branching of dentinal tubules in human teeth. Arch Oral Biol. 1996;41(5):401-412.
16. Ballal NV, Kandaswamy D, Venkateshbabu N, et al. Effect of smear layer removal on sealer penetration and microleakage. J Conserv Dent. 2011;14(1):16-21.
17. Bitter K, Paris S, Martus P, Schartner R, Kielbassa AM. A confocal laser scanning microscope investigation of different dental adhesives bonded to root canal dentine. Int Endod J. 2004;37(12):840-848.
18. Lacey S, Pitt Ford TR, Yuan XF, Sherriff M, Watson T. The effect of temperature on viscosity of root canal sealers. Int Endod J. 2006;39(11):860-866.
19. De-Deus G, Brandão MC, Leal F, Reis C, Souza EM, Luna AS, et al. Lack of correlation between sealer penetration into dentinal tubules and sealability in nonbonded root fillings. Int Endod J. 2012;45(7):642-651.
20. Zhang W, Li Z, Peng B. Ex vivo cytotoxicity of a new calcium silicate–based canal filling material. Int Endod J. 2010;43(9):769-774.
21. ElHaddad E, AlShwaimi E. Evaluation of the dentinal tubule penetration of bioceramic sealers with different obturation techniques. Restor Dent Endod. 2018;43(3):e35.
22. AlShwaimi E, Bogari D, Ajaj R, Al-Shahrani S, Almas K, Majeed A. In vitro antimicrobial effectiveness of root canal sealers against Enterococcus faecalis: a systematic review. J Endod. 2016;42(11):1588-1597.
23. Nagas E, Uyanik MO, Eymirli A, Cehreli ZC, Vallittu PK, Lassila LVJ, et al. Dentin moisture conditions affect the adhesion of root canal sealers. J Endod. 2012;38(2):240-244.
24. Siqueira JF Jr, Rôças IN, Lopes HP, Elias CN, de Uzeda M. Fungal infection of the radicular dentin. J Endod. 2002;28(11):770-773.
25. Tay FR, Pashley DH. Monoblocks in root canals: a hypothetical or a tangible goal. J Endod. 2007;33(4):391-398.