Abstract
ABSTRACT
Aim
To evaluate the bond strength of the reformulated epoxy resin‐based sealer AH Plus Ribbon to gutta‐percha using a previously described microshear bond strength test, and to compare its performance with that of six commercially available endodontic sealers representing different chemical classes.
Methodology
One hundred and forty gutta‐percha discs (10 mm × 2 mm) were fabricated from standardized sheets and randomly allocated to seven groups (
n
= 10 microshear specimens per group, assembled from 20 discs) according to the sealer evaluated: AH Plus Ribbon, AH Plus, EndoSequence BC Sealer, NeoSealer Flo, Pulp Canal Sealer, Endomethasone N and Sealapex. A standardized volume of sealer (0.1 mL) was placed between two gutta‐percha discs under a constant load (0.0981 N) for 200 s. After storage at 37°C for 7 days in contact with phosphate‐buffered saline‐moistened gauze, microshear bond strength was determined using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. Bond strength values (MPa) were analysed by one‐way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post hoc test (
α
= 0.05).
Results
No premature failures occurred during specimen preparation, storage, or testing. Sealer type significantly influenced bond strength to gutta‐percha (
p
p
= 0.722). Pulp Canal Sealer and Endomethasone N showed intermediate bond strength, whereas EndoSequence BC Sealer, NeoSealer Flo and Sealapex exhibited the lowest values, with no significant differences among them (
p
> 0.05).
Conclusions
AH Plus Ribbon exhibited bond strength to gutta‐percha comparable to that of AH Plus and significantly higher than that of EndoSequence BC Sealer, NeoSealer Flo, Pulp Canal Sealer, Endomethasone N and Sealapex under the experimental conditions employed.