Content uploaded by David Donnermeyer
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by David Donnermeyer on Oct 27, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Donnermeyer, D.;
Schemkämper, P.; Bürklein, S.;
Schäfer, E. Short and Long-Term
Solubility, Alkalizing Effect, and
Thermal Persistence of Premixed
Calcium Silicate-Based Sealers: AH
Plus Bioceramic Sealer vs. Total Fill
BC Sealer. Materials 2022,15, 7320.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15207320
Academic Editors: Tobias Tauböck
and Matej Par
Received: 28 September 2022
Accepted: 14 October 2022
Published: 19 October 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
materials
Article
Short and Long-Term Solubility, Alkalizing Effect, and Thermal
Persistence of Premixed Calcium Silicate-Based Sealers:
AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer vs. Total Fill BC Sealer
David Donnermeyer 1, * , Patrick Schemkämper 1, Sebastian Bürklein 2and Edgar Schäfer 2
1Department of Periodontology and Operative Dentistry, Westphalian Wilhelms-University,
Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building W 30, 48149 Münster, Germany
2
Central Interdisciplinary Ambulance in the School of Dentistry, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building W 30,
48149 Münster, Germany
*Correspondence: david.donnermeyer@ukmuenster.de; Tel.: +49-251-8347064
Abstract:
This study aimed to investigate the short- and long-term solubility, alkalizing potential,
and suitability for warm-vertical compaction of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer (AHBC), and Total Fill BC
Sealer (TFBC) compared to the epoxy-resin sealer AH Plus (AHP). A solubility test was performed
according to ISO specification 6876 and further similar to ISO requirements over a period of 1 month
in distilled water (AD) and 4 months in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS). The pH of the immersion
solution was determined weekly. Sealers were exposed to thermal treatment at 37, 57, 67, and 97
◦
C
for 30 s. Furthermore, heat treatment at 97
◦
C was performed for 180 s to simulate inappropriate
implementation of warm vertical filling techniques. Physical properties (setting time, flow, film
thickness according to ISO 6876) and chemical properties (Fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy)
were assessed. AHBC and TFBC were associated with significantly higher solubility than AHP
over 1 month in AD and 4 months in PBS (p< 0.05). AHBC and TFBC both reached high initial
alkaline pH, while TFBC was associated with a longer-lasting alkaline potential than AHBC. Initial
pH of AHBC and TFBC was higher in AD than in PBS. None of the sealers were compromised by
thermal treatment.
Keywords:
AH plus Bioceramic Sealer; alkalizing potential; pH; solubility; Total Fill BC Sealer; warm
vertical compaction
1. Introduction
Calcium silicate-based sealers have emerged as a relevant alternative to epoxy resin
sealers in the past decade. Clinical studies have reported on the successful implementation
of premixed calcium silicate-based sealers in root canal obturation [
1
,
2
]. Due to their bene-
ficial properties concerning antimicrobial activity, biocompatibility, and bioactivity, these
sealers have changed the perspective on root canal obturation, but have also demanded
new concepts because their effects mainly rely on a high proportion of sealer inside the
root canal filling [3].
Most of their beneficial properties are based on the solubility of reactional by-products
of calcium silicates over a period of several weeks [
4
]. Mainly, the dissolution of calcium
hydroxide during the initial setting reaction of calcium silicates with water is the princi-
ple of the advantageous properties [
5
]. While there is consensus that the aim of a root
canal obturation should be a long-lasting fluid and bacteria tight seal of the root canal
system, drawbacks concerning solubility of calcium silicate-based sealers are a matter
of
discussion [6]
. High solubility could result in a weaker seal of the root canal system,
allowing tissue fluid to leak into the apical region of the root canal system and byprod-
ucts of trapped bacteria to leak out of the root canal system [
6
]. A smaller proportion of
sealer achieved by warm compaction of the gutta-percha core materials could address this
Materials 2022,15, 7320. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15207320 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/materials
Materials 2022,15, 7320 2 of 10
problem. While this would adversely compromise the beneficial properties of calcium-
silicate based sealers, it is also necessary to investigate the thermal stability of sealers before
subjecting them to such techniques [
7
]. Destruction of the sealer component’s chemical
structure could result in insufficient root canal obturation due to incomplete setting. In
addition, the changes of physical properties, e.g., flow or film thickness, would lead to
insufficient root canal obturation because the sealer may not be able to reach the complete
complex anatomy of the root canal system.
Recently, a new premixed calcium silicate-based sealer, AH Plus Bioceramic (AHBC,
Dentsply Sirona, York, PA, USA), was introduced. While it contains only tricalcium silicate
as a reactive component and not di- and tri-calcium silicates like most other calcium silicate-
based materials such as Total Fill BC Sealer (TFBC; FKG Dentaire, La Chaux-des-Fonds,
Switzerland), AHBC comprises dimethyl sulfoxide as a filler, which is not known from
other calcium silicate-based sealers. This results in a lower proportion of calcium silicates
than in other premixed sealers like TFBC. No data exist to date addressing the formulation
of AHBC in terms of its solubility and alkalizing potential over short and long periods and
its suitability for warm obturation techniques.
The aim of this study was to measure the short- and long-term solubility, pH, and
thermal stability of the new AHBC compared to a contemporary well-investigated calcium-
silicate-based sealer TFBC and the epoxy resin-based sealer AH Plus (AHP,
Dentsply Sirona).
2. Materials and Methods
AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer and Total Fill BC Sealer were investigated. Both sealers are
premixed products, and no preparations were needed. AH Plus, which was mixed using
the AH Plus Jet, served as the control.
2.1. Sample Size Calculation
Power calculation using G*Power 3.1 (Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf, Ger-
many) indicated a sample size of at least nine samples per group. Thus, 10 samples were
prepared per group for solubility evaluation. Concerning the physical properties after
thermal treatment, three tests were carried out for each temperature level and each sealer
and the mean was calculated according to ISO 6876 [8].
2.2. Solubility (Long-Term)
To evaluate the long-term solubility, sealer specimens were immersed in distilled water
(AD) and in phosphate buffered saline solution (PBS, Pharmacy of the University Hospital,
Münster, Germany), and the specimens’ change in weight was recorded in a modification of
a methodology described previously [
4
]. Stainless steel ring washers (
height 1.6 ±0.1 mm
,
internal diameter 20.0
±
0.1 mm) were cleaned in an ultrasound bath with acetone for
15 min
and a teflon band was fixed on each washer. The prepared washers were weighed
three times (accuracy
±
0.0001 g; Sartorius 1801 MPS, Göttingen, Germany), and the mean
was calculated. The washers were placed on a glass plate and filled to slight excess with
sealer dispensed from the syringes. To ensure complete setting of all sealers before testing,
glass plates and samples were placed on a gauze immersed in physiological solution (PBS)
in a closed container at 37
◦
C for 24 h. The proper setting was evaluated in preliminary
experiments. After setting of the sealers, excess material was trimmed to the surface level
of the washer by using silicon carbide paper (600 grit). The specimens were weighed three
times before the immersion of the samples and the sealer weight was calculated. Twenty
samples were prepared for immersion in AD and 40 samples for immersion in PBS
(150 mL)
were prepared from each sealer. Each of the 10 samples were immersed in AD for 14 and
28 days and in PBS for 24 h, 14 and 28 days, and 2 and 4 months. Twenty washers for
each group were prepared for immersion in AD or PBS (n = 10) without any sealer as the
negative control during the entire period of 1 and 4 months, respectively. All samples were
stored in an incubator (Heraeus, Hanau, Germany) at 37
◦
C and 100% relative humidity.
After 24 h, the first fluid change was performed on all samples and all fluids were changed
Materials 2022,15, 7320 3 of 10
every 7 days thereafter. After immersion, the samples were weighed again three times, and
the mass of the sealers was determined. The difference between the original weight of the
material and its final weight was recorded and the percentual mass loss was calculated
as solubility.
2.3. Solubility (Short-Term)
A solubility test was carried out over 24 h according to ISO specification 6876 in
AD and in PBS. Sealer specimens were prepared in ring molds as stated by ISO 6876
specification. After determination of the sealer mass (accuracy
±
0.0001 g; Sartorius
1801MPS), 2 specimens of each sealer were immersed in 50 mL AD in a covered dish and
placed in an incubator (Heraeus) at 37
◦
C and 100% humidity. After 24 h, the specimens
were washed with AD and dried. The samples were weighed 3 times, and the mean mass
of the sealers was determined. The difference between the original weight of the material
and its final weight was recorded and the percentual mass loss was calculated as solubility.
2.4. pH
The pH value assessment was performed parallel to the solubility test [
4
]. The pH
value was determined with an electrode pH meter (PB 11, Sartorius, Göttingen, Germany).
The accuracy of the pH meter was controlled with calibration solutions (pH 4, 7, and
10; Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). After each individual measurement, the electrode was
flushed with AD. The pH measurement was carried out after 24 h, and weekly before
renewal of the test liquids at 37 ◦C fluid temperature.
2.5. Thermal Treatment—Physical Properties
Setting time, film thickness, and flow were assessed similar to ISO specification 6876
and after thermal treatment, as described previously [
7
,
9
]. Portions of 0.5 mL of each
sealer were dispensed directly into a 2 mL plastic tube (Safe-Lock Tubes, Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany). A K-type thermocouple (GHM Messtechnik, Regenstauf, Germany)
was placed into the sealer, and the samples were heated in a thermo-controlled water bath
until temperatures of 37
◦
C, 57
◦
C, 67
◦
C, and 97
◦
C were achieved inside the samples.
These temperatures were selected in accordance with recently published data [
7
,
9
,
10
].
The temperature of the sealer was controlled by GSVmulti software (version 1.27, ME-
Meßsysteme, Hennigsdorf, Germany) at a frequency of 50 Hz using the thermocouple. All
samples were retained for 30 s at the respective temperatures and were cooled to 37
◦
C in
a second water bath afterward. For the evaluation of the influence of elongated heating,
sealers were also heated to 97 ◦C for 180 s. The described procedure took about 3 min.
The setting time was assessed by dispensing the preheated sealer specimens onto glass
plates inside a stainless-steel ring (d = 10 mm, h = 2 mm). After transfer to an incubator
at 37
◦
C and 100% humidity, a stopwatch was used to determine the setting time of the
material. A cylindrical indenter with a flat end tip diameter of 2 mm and a mass of
100 g
was used as defined in ISO 6876. The materials setting point was defined as the point
when the needle left no indentation on the sealer’s surface anymore. A film thickness test
was carried out similar to ISO 6876 with slight modifications of the temporal process due
to the preheating of the sealers. After the thermal treatment, a portion of each specimen
was placed on a glass plate measuring 40 mm
×
40 mm and 5 mm in thickness. A second
glass plate of 5 mm thickness and a surface area of 200 mm
2
was placed centrally on top.
A load of 150 N was generated vertically on the top plate by a universal testing machine
(Lloyd LF Plus, Ametek, Berwyn, PA, USA) for 10 min. The thickness of the two assembled
glass plates was measured before each test and after the testing procedure using a digital
micrometer. Due to a higher viscosity of the sealers reported at high temperatures [
9
],
the sealers were portioned by weight instead of volume. Using a precision scale and a
graduated pipette, 0.05 mL of sealer was found to correspond 0.1285 g of AHBC,
0.1265 g
of TFBC [
9
], and 0.140 g of AHP [
7
], respectively, at 20
◦
C. A portion of each specimen
was placed on a glass plate measuring 40 mm
×
40 mm and 5 mm in thickness. A second
Materials 2022,15, 7320 4 of 10
glass plate with the same dimension and a weight resulting in a total mass of 120 g were
placed on top centrally and the assembly was left for 10 min. The maximum and minimum
diameters of the compressed sealer phase were measured using a digital caliper. If the
maximum and minimum diameters were within 1 mm, the mean was calculated. Three
tests were carried out for each temperature level.
2.6. Thermal Treatment—Chemical Properties
For Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, the specimens were stored on glass plates
in an incubator for 8 weeks at 37
◦
C and 100% humidity. The set specimens were powdered
using a mortar. Then, 0.002 g of sealer powder were added to 0.2 g potassium bromide
and pressed to a pill. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy was performed using the
Vertex 70v with a mercury cadmium telluride MCT detector (Bruker, Billerica, MA, USA) by
256 scans
per test 2 times at each temperature level. One result was selected for evaluation
in case no difference occurred between the spectra [9].
2.7. Statistical Analysis
Data of solubility were normally distributed (Kolmogorov–Smirnov-test) and analyzed
with ANOVA and Scheffépost hoc test (p= 0.05). Data concerning physical properties
(setting time, film thickness, and flow) were analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis test at p= 0.05.
3. Results
3.1. Solubility (Long-Term)
After 14 days and 28 days AHBC and TFBC showed higher solubility (about 30%) in
AD with an increase over time, while AHP was not associated with relevant solubility. The
difference between the calcium silicate-based sealers AHBC and TFBC was significant at
14 and 28 days (p< 0.05). After 28 days, TFBC was associated with significantly higher
solubility than AHBC (p< 0.05), while no such difference was observed after 14 days.
Immersed in PBS, the solubility of AHBC and TFBC was lower at 14 and 28 days compared
to AD. Over a 4-month period in PBS, the solubility of AHBC and TFBC was significantly
higher than of AHP at all measurement times (p< 0.05). Significant differences between
AHBC and TFBC were only detected after 14 days in PBS, when AHBC presented with
significantly higher solubility (p< 0.05) (Table 1).
Table 1.
Means and standard deviations: solubility of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer, Total Fill BC Sealer,
and AH Plus in AD over 28 days and in PBS over 4 months, respectively. Superscript letters indicate
statistically significant differences at measurement dates in AD and PBS (p< 0.05).
AD PBS
AH Plus
Bioceramic Sealer Total Fill BC Sealer AH Plus AH Plus
Bioceramic Sealer Total Fill BC Sealer AH Plus
14 days 30.44 ±1.00 A32.75 ±5.26 A0.55 ±0.17 B19.24 ±2.56 A14.05 ±2.35 B0.02 ±0.23 C
28 days 33.09 ±0.81 B35.55 ±1.35 A0.48 ±0.20 C20.80 ±2.01 A20.64 ±2.87 A0.28 ±0.16 B
2 months 16.82 ±2.38 A14.78 ±4.02 A0.30 ±0.18 B
4 months 18.40 ±1.91 A20.50 ±9.23 A0.32 ±0.08 B
3.2. Solubility (Short-Term)
The results of the solubility test according to ISO 6876 are presented in Table 2. While
AH Plus presented with negligible weight loss both in AD and PBS, the calcium silicate-
based sealer AHBC and TFBC were associated with relevant loss up to 34.3%. The solubility
of AHBC and TBC presented similarly high in AD and PBS after 24 h.
Materials 2022,15, 7320 5 of 10
Table 2.
Solubility of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer, Total Fill BC Sealer, and AH Plus after 24 h in AD
according to ISO 6876, and in PBS.
AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer Total Fill BC Sealer AH Plus
AD PBS AD PBS AD PBS
Solubility (%) 33.2 33.7 28.7 32.1 0.4 0.5
3.3. pH
AHBC and TFBC reached high pH values above 12 after 24 h in AD. The pH in AD
constantly decreased over 1 month with AHBC showing a more pronounced decrease.
Immersed in PBS, both sealers reached high initial pH values. The pH of TFBC decreased
constantly over a period of 3 months until no relevant alkalization of the buffer solution
was measured. A faster pH decrease was observed, with AHBC reaching close to the
baseline pH after 1.5 months already (Figure 1). AHP did not influence the pH of the
immersion solutions.
Materials2022,15,73206of11
Figure1.pHofAHPlusBioceramicSealer,TotalFillBCSealer,andAHPlusindistilledwater(AD)
over28daysandinPBSover4months,respectively.
3.4.ThermalTreatment—PhysicalProperties
Thesettingtime,filmthickness,andflowofallsealerswerenotrelevantlyinfluenced
byanythermaltreatmentanddidnotexceedclinicallyrelevantandISO‐defined
thresholds[8](Tables3–5).Significantdifferencesinthesettingtimewereobservedforall
sealers(p<0.05),butnoneofthemwerefollowingapattern.Thefilmthicknessofneither
AHBC,TFBC,norAHPwasaffectedsignificantlybythermaltreatment(p>0.05).The
flowofAHBCdecreasedwithincreasingtemperature.Significantdifferencesonly
occurredbetween37°C(30s)and97°C(180s)(p<0.05).TheflowofTFBCslightly
decreasedwiththermalexposure,showingstatisticallysignificantdifferencesbetween57
Figure 1.
pH of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer, Total Fill BC Sealer, and AH Plus in distilled water (AD)
over 28 days and in PBS over 4 months, respectively.
Materials 2022,15, 7320 6 of 10
3.4. Thermal Treatment—Physical Properties
The setting time, film thickness, and flow of all sealers were not relevantly influ-
enced by any thermal treatment and did not exceed clinically relevant and ISO-defined
thresholds [
8
] (Tables 3–5). Significant differences in the setting time were observed for all
sealers (p< 0.05), but none of them were following a pattern. The film thickness of neither
AHBC, TFBC, nor AHP was affected significantly by thermal treatment (p> 0.05). The flow
of AHBC decreased with increasing temperature. Significant differences only occurred
between 37
◦
C (30 s) and 97
◦
C (180 s) (p< 0.05). The flow of TFBC slightly decreased with
thermal exposure, showing statistically significant differences between 57
◦
C (30 s) and
97 ◦C (180 s)
(p< 0.05). No statistically significant changes of flow were observed for AHP
(p> 0.05).
Table 3.
Physical properties in accordance with ISO 6876 of AH Plus Bioceramic (means and standard
deviations (SD)) after thermal treatment. Statistical analysis of setting time, film thickness, and flow
for AH Plus Bioceramic was performed by Kruskal–Wallis test (p< 0.05).
Group
Number Setting Time (h) Film Thickness (m) Flow (mm)
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
37 (30 s) 1 9.861 0.369 0.016 0.007 25.7 1.0 5
57 (30 s) 2 10.472 0.243 0.020 0.011 25.5 2.1
67 (30 s) 3 11.156 0.184 5 0.022 0.008 22.8 0.7
97 (30 s) 4 10.850 0.200 0.015 0.002 18.6 0.5
97 (180 s) 5 9.200 0.225 3 0.017 0.005 16.1 0.4 1
Table 4.
Physical properties in accordance with ISO 6876 of Total Fill BC Sealer (means and standard
deviations (SD)) after thermal treatment. Statistical analysis of setting time, film thickness, and flow
for Total Fill BC Sealer was performed by Kruskal–Wallis test (p< 0.05).
Group
Number Setting Time (h) Film Thickness (m) Flow (mm)
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
37 (30 s) 1 24.383 0.166 5 0.018 0.002 25.1 0.7
57 (30 s) 2 23.850 0.350 0.020 0.002 26.3 1.4 5
67 (30 s) 3 23.507 0.081 0.019 0.003 25.0 0.6
97 (30 s) 4 22.897 0.387 0.017 0.001 23.2 0.3
97 (180 s) 5 21.303 0.160 1 0.017 0.002 21.0 0.7 2
Table 5.
Physical properties in accordance with ISO 6876 of AH Plus (means and standard deviations
(SD)) after thermal treatment. Statistical analysis of setting time, film thickness, and flow for AH Plus
was performed by Kruskal–Wallis test (p< 0.05).
Group
Number Setting Time (h) Film Thickness (m) Flow (mm)
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
Mean SD
Different
from Group
Number
37 (30 s) 1 9.77 0.30 5 0.027 0.002 22.1 0.5
57 (30 s) 2 9.59 0.15 0.028 0.007 23.3 0.4
67 (30 s) 3 8.61 0.21 0.026 0.003 23.1 0.8
97 (30 s) 4 8.14 0.25 0.025 0.001 24.8 0.7
97 (180 s) 5 7.41 0.28 1 0.026 0.001 23.2 0.9
3.5. Thermal Treatment—Chemical Properties
No changes of the chemical structure of AHBC, TFBC, and AHP were indicated by the
spectroscopic plots of FT-IR spectroscopy at any thermal treatment level (Figure 2). Both
AHBC and TFBC spectroscopic plots indicated the presence of water by a broad absorption
Materials 2022,15, 7320 7 of 10
band around 3400 cm
−1
and a peak at 1650 cm
−1
[
9
,
11
]. Carbonates were detected for
AHBC and TFBC at 878 cm
−1
and between 1400 and 1500 cm
−1
[
12
]. A calcium hydroxide
band (O-H-stretch at 3646 cm
−1
) was not detected in AHBC and TFBC. Absorption between
970 and 1000 cm
−1
was observed with AHBC and TFBC, as this indicated the formation of
calcium silicate hydrate [
12
]. Characteristic peaks at ~2874 cm
−1
and 2923 cm
−1
, which
are assigned to symmetric stretching of -CH3 and C-H-stretching of -CH2-, respectively,
were found in TFBC but not in AHBC [
13
]. A peak at 1044 cm
−1
indicated the presence of
dimethyl sulfoxide solely in AHBC specimens [14] (Figure 2).
Materials2022,15,73208of11
indicatedtheformationofcalciumsilicatehydrate[12].Characteristicpeaksat~2874cm−1
and2923cm−1,whichareassignedtosymmetricstretchingof‐CH3andC‐H‐stretchingof
‐CH2‐,respectively,werefoundinTFBCbutnotinAHBC[13].Apeakat1044cm−1
indicatedthepresenceofdimethylsulfoxidesolelyinAHBCspecimens[14](Figure2).
Figure2.SpectroscopicplotsofFT‐IRspectroscopyafterthermaltreatmentofAHBC,TFBC,and
AHP.
4.Discussion
Inpreviousstudiesevidencewasfoundthatthesolubility,alkalizingpotential,and
bondstrengthofcalciumsilicate‐basedsealersdependontheimmersionsolution[4,15].
Itwasassumedthattheprecipitationofhydroxyapatiteonthesurfaceofcalciumsilicate‐
basedmaterialsaftercontacttophosphateconcludesinadecreaseofsolubility[4].Along‐
termstudyonthesolubilityandpHofthetwo‐componentcalciumsilicate‐basedsealer
BioRootRCS(Septodont,St.Maur‐des‐Fossés,France)corroboratedthisthesis.So,farno
comparisonsoflong‐term‐solubilityandpHinvestigationsexistonpremixedcalcium
silicate‐basedsealers.Therefore,thepurposeofthisstudywastoinvestigatethelong‐
termsolubilityofpremixedcalcium‐silicate‐basedsealerTFBCandAHBCinADandPBS
Figure 2.
Spectroscopic plots of FT-IR spectroscopy after thermal treatment of AHBC, TFBC,
and AHP.
4. Discussion
In previous studies evidence was found that the solubility, alkalizing potential, and
bond strength of calcium silicate-based sealers depend on the immersion solution [
4
,
15
]. It
was assumed that the precipitation of hydroxy apatite on the surface of calcium silicate-
based materials after contact to phosphate concludes in a decrease of solubility [
4
]. A
long-term study on the solubility and pH of the two-component calcium silicate-based
sealer BioRoot RCS (Septodont, St. Maur-des-Fossés, France) corroborated this thesis.
So, far no comparisons of long-term-solubility and pH investigations exist on premixed
Materials 2022,15, 7320 8 of 10
calcium silicate-based sealers. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the
long-term solubility of premixed calcium-silicate-based sealer TFBC and AHBC in AD and
PBS over 1 and 4 months, respectively, and to compare these results with a 24 h-testing
protocol according to ISO specification 6876 in AD and PBS.
The solubility tests were performed similar to the ISO 6876 testing protocol. While the
ISO specification 6876 demands solubility testing in AD only, the test was also performed in
PBS. As immersion in AD is not capable of predicting solubility in isotonic body fluids in the
in vivo
situation [
16
], PBS was used to simulate a proper environment. In addition, the ISO
specification 6876 demands testing only for a period of 24 h, while calcium silicate-based
materials are known for prolonged setting reactions [
17
]. Therefore, tests were performed
in AD for up to 28 days and in PBS for 4 months to evaluate the clinical effect of solubility
and alkalization.
In general, solubility is investigated in AD after 24 h of immersion. Still, the results
published on solubility of TFBC show a wide range [
18
]. While some studies reported
solubility less than 3% [
19
,
20
], others found solubility of more than 20% [
21
]. According
to the present results, the solubility of TFBC was high both in AD and PBS with 28.7%
and 32.1%, respectively. Subsequently, AHBC was associated with high solubility of 33.2%
(AD) and 33.7% (PBS) after 24 h. The type of immersion solution did not influence the
high initial solubility of TFBC and AHBC. In the follow-up period of 28 days in AD, the
solubility of AHBC and TFBC did not relevantly increase, indicating that premixed calcium
silicate-based sealers show high solubility during the initial setting phase and are stable
hereafter. Still, the solubility of TFBC was significantly higher than that of AHBC after
28 days
in AD. A possible explanation could be the lower proportion of calcium silicates
in AHBC. Corroborating results can be found after immersion in PBS, when the solubility
did not increase over a 4-month period. Percentual solubility presented even lower after
14 days to 4 months compared to 24 h, which could be explained by the precipitation of
hydroxy apatite on the specimens’ surface increasing the sealers’ weight.
AHBC and TFBC showed a high initial alkalizing potential after 24 h. In accordance
with previous results, pH values determined in AD were higher than in PBS [
4
]. It was
hypothesized that leaked calcium hydroxide from the sealer matrix, which is the main
reason for the alkalizing potential of calcium silicate-based sealers, is buffered in PBS when
it reacts with phosphate from the solution forming hydroxy apatite [
5
]. This reaction may
not occur in AD, allowing more calcium hydroxide to dilute into the immersion solution.
In AD, TFBC was capable of remaining highly alkaline over the period of 28 days,
while pH of AHBC started to decline after 14 days. This was also observed in PBS. After
6 weeks
, AHBC nearly decreased to the initial pH of the PBS solution. In contrast, the pH
of TFBC decreased more slowly, keeping the alkaline pH for nearly 4 months. Long-term
alkalization could coincide with the formulation of the investigated sealers. While TFBC
contains about 27 to 50% calcium silicates and 1 to 4% calcium hydroxide as stated by the
manufacturer, the percentual proportion is only 5 to 15% calcium silicates in AHBC. The
more calcium silicates are present, the more calcium hydroxide can be generated from their
setting reaction. As the setting reaction of calcium silicates is known to last for several
weeks, a higher proportion of calcium silicates could be an indicator for the longer lasting
alkalization. A high pH is even prolonged when di-calcium silicates are present, as in
TFBC, because di-calcium silicates present with slower reaction kinematics. Meanwhile,
tri-calcium silicates, which are the only source of calcium hydroxide in AHBC, are more
reactive in the initial phase of the calcium silicate setting reaction.
The alkaline pH caused by calcium silicate-based sealers is regarded as one of their
major advantages. Calcium hydroxide is the major factor in biocompatibility as it leads
to the formation of hydroxy apatite on the sealer surface after coming in contact with
body fluid, and it also plays a role in the eradication of microorganisms still present after
chemo-mechanical preparation in niches of the infected root canal system [
22
]. Calcium
hydroxide also slowly affects microorganisms. Therefore, a long-lasting replenishment of
calcium hydroxide from a calcium silicate-based sealer could be regarded beneficial and
Materials 2022,15, 7320 9 of 10
compensate for disadvantages such as high initial solubility. Furthermore, the alkaline
pH is capable of inducing apical healing and mineralization of the apical alveolar bone
structure. Accordingly, good biocompatibility was reported for AHBC and TFBC [
23
]. Still,
a higher mineralization potential was associated with TFBC compared to AHBC [
23
], which
is consistent with the higher and prolonged alkaline pH caused by the elution of calcium
hydroxide observed in the present study.
When it comes to the investigation of the effect of heat on sealer stability, choosing
a clinically relevant temperature and exposure period is crucial for interpretation of the
results [
10
]. Thus, a range of temperatures and application times was investigated as
described previously [
7
,
9
]. While a resistance to the thermal treatment of TFBC and
AHP in terms of its physical properties and its chemical structure has been previously
reported [
7
,
9
,
11
,
24
], no such data is available for the new AHBC. In addition to the stability
of the physical properties and the FTIR spectra at all temperature levels, the presence
of carbonates in the FTIR spectra is a sign of the formation of calcium hydroxide and
indicates that the setting reaction of calcium silicates was not influenced by the thermal
treatment. Calcium hydroxide reacts with carbon dioxide under atmospheric storage
forming carbonates. Additionally, the bands indicating organic molecules are present
in all spectra of AHBC and TFBC, indicating that the organic fillers used as thickening
agents are able to withstand short period thermal stress. In accordance with the results for
other premixed calcium silicate-based sealers [
9
,
11
,
24
,
25
], AHBC was found to be resistant
against the thermal treatment performed in this study.
Premixed calcium silicate-based sealers presented with higher solubility and pH than
the epoxy-resin sealer AH Plus. Still, among the premixed calcium silicate-based sealers,
differences in the alkalizing potential both in AD and PBS were found to correspond to
the sealer formulations. Premixed calcium silicate-based sealers were resistant to the heat
ranges that occur during warm obturation techniques.
5. Conclusions
High solubility is inherent with premixed calcium silicate-based sealers. This results
in high alkalizing potential, which is a major benefit in the application of calcium-silicate-
based sealers. The higher the proportion of di- and tri-calcium silicates, the longer the
alkaline pH can be observed. AHBC and TFBC can be considered as safe for warm-
vertical compaction.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, D.D. and E.S.; methodology, D.D.; software, E.S. and
D.D.; validation, P.S. and E.S.; formal analysis, D.D.; investigation, P.S. and D.D.; resources, E.S.; data
curation, D.D. and E.S.; writing—original draft preparation, D.D.; writing—review and editing, E.S.
and S.B.; visualization, D.D.; supervision, D.D.; project administration, D.D. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement:
The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author.
Acknowledgments:
The authors thank Iris Weber and Maximilian P. Reitze, both from the Institute
for Planetology, Westphalian Wilhelms-University, Muenster, Germany, for FTIR spectroscopy.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Materials 2022,15, 7320 10 of 10
References
1.
Chybowski, E.A.; Glickman, G.N.; Patel, Y.; Fleury, A.; Solomon, E.; He, J. Clinical Outcome of Non-Surgical Root Canal Treatment
Using a Single-Cone Technique with Endosequence Bioceramic Sealer: A Retrospective Analysis. J. Endod.
2018
,44, 941–945.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
2.
Zavattini, A.; Knight, A.; Foschi, F.; Mannocci, F. Outcome of Root Canal Treatments Using a New Calcium Silicate Root Canal
Sealer: A Non-Randomized Clinical Trial. J. Clin. Med. 2020,9, 782. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3.
Camilleri, J.; Atmeh, A.; Li, X.; Meschi, N. Present Status and Future Directions: Hydraulic Materials for Endodontic Use. Int.
Endod. J. 2022,55 (Suppl. S3), 710–777. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4.
Urban, K.; Neuhaus, J.; Donnermeyer, D.; Schäfer, E.; Dammaschke, T. Solubility and PH Value of 3 Different Root Canal Sealers:
A Long-Term Investigation. J. Endod. 2018,44, 1736–1740. [CrossRef]
5.
Donnermeyer, D.; Bürklein, S.; Dammaschke, T.; Schäfer, E. Endodontic Sealers Based on Calcium Silicates: A Systematic Review.
Odontology 2019,107, 421–436. [CrossRef]
6. Aminoshariae, A.; Primus, C.; Kulild, J.C. Tricalcium Silicate Cement Sealers: Do the Potential Benefits of Bioactivity Justify the
Drawbacks? J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2022,153, 750–760. [CrossRef]
7.
Donnermeyer, D.; Urban, K.; Bürklein, S.; Schäfer, E. Physico-Chemical Investigation of Endodontic Sealers Exposed to Simulated
Intracanal Heat Application: Epoxy Resins and Zinc Oxide–Eugenols. Int. Endod. J. 2020,53, 690–697. [CrossRef]
8.
ISO 6876:2012; Dentistry—Root Canal Sealing Materials. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva,
Switzerland, 2012.
9.
Donnermeyer, D.; Ibing, M.; Bürklein, S.; Weber, I.; Reitze, M.P.; Schäfer, E. Physico-Chemical Investigation of Endodontic Sealers
Exposed to Simulated Intracanal Heat Application: Hydraulic Calcium Silicate-Based Sealers. Materials
2021
,14, 728. [CrossRef]
10.
Donnermeyer, D.; Schäfer, E.; Bürklein, S. Real-Time Intracanal Temperature Measurement During Different Obturation Tech-
niques. J. Endod. 2018,44, 1832–1836. [CrossRef]
11.
Chen, B.; Haapasalo, M.; Mobuchon, C.; Li, X.; Ma, J.; Shen, Y. Cytotoxicity and the Effect of Temperature on Physical Properties
and Chemical Composition of a New Calcium Silicate-Based Root Canal Sealer. J. Endod. 2020,46, 531–538. [CrossRef]
12.
Ylmén, R.; Jäglid, U.; Steenari, B.M.; Panas, I. Early Hydration and Setting of Portland Cement Monitored by IR, SEM and Vicat
Techniques. Cem. Concr. Res. 2009,39, 433–439. [CrossRef]
13.
Asensio, R.C.; San Andrés Moya, M.; De La Roja, J.M.; Gómez, M. Analytical Characterization of Polymers Used in Conservation
and Restoration by ATR-FTIR Spectroscopy. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2009,395, 2081–2096. [CrossRef]
14.
Fawcett, W.R.; Liu, G.; Kessler, T.E. Solvent-Induced Frequency Shifts in the Infrared Spectrum of Acetonitrile in Organic Solvents.
J. Phys. Chem. 1993,97, 9293–9298. [CrossRef]
15.
Donnermeyer, D.; Göbell, L.; Bürklein, S.; Dammaschke, T.; Schäfer, E. Duration of Immersion and Type of Immersion Solution
Distort the Outcome of Push-Out Bond Strength Testing Protocols. Materials 2019,12, 2860. [CrossRef]
16.
Benezra, M.K.; Wismayer, P.S.; Camilleri, J. Influence of Environment on Testing of Hydraulic Sealers. Sci. Rep.
2017
,7, 17927.
[CrossRef]
17.
Chedella, S.C.V.; Berzins, D.W. A Differential Scanning Calorimetry Study of the Setting Reaction of MTA. Int. Endod. J.
2010
,43,
509–518. [CrossRef]
18.
Silva, E.J.N.L.; Cardoso, M.L.; Rodrigues, J.P.; De-Deus, G.; Fidalgo, T.K.d.S. Solubility of Bioceramic- and Epoxy Resin-Based
Root Canal Sealers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Aust. Endod. J. 2021,47, 690–702. [CrossRef]
19.
Zhou, H.M.; Shen, Y.; Zheng, W.; Li, L.; Zheng, Y.F.; Haapasalo, M. Physical Properties of 5 Root Canal Sealers. J. Endod.
2013
,39,
1281–1286. [CrossRef]
20.
Ersahan, S.; Aydin, C. Solubility and Apical Sealing Characteristics of a New Calcium Silicate-Based Root Canal Sealer in
Comparison to Calcium Hydroxide-, Methacrylate Resin- and Epoxy Resin-Based Sealers. Acta Odontol. Scand.
2013
,71, 857–862.
[CrossRef]
21.
Borges, R.P.; Sousa-Neto, M.D.; Versiani, M.A.; Rached-Júnior, F.A.; De-Deus, G.; Miranda, C.E.S.; Pécora, J.D. Changes in the
Surface of Four Calcium Silicate-Containing Endodontic Materials and an Epoxy Resin-Based Sealer after a Solubility Test. Int.
Endod. J. 2012,45, 419–428. [CrossRef]
22.
Mohammadi, Z.; Dummer, P.M.H. Properties and Applications of Calcium Hydroxide in Endodontics and Dental Traumatology.
Int. Endod. J. 2011,44, 697–730. [CrossRef]
23.
Sanz, J.L.; López-García, S.; Rodríguez-Lozano, F.J.; Melo, M.; Lozano, A.; Llena, C.; Forner, L. Cytocompatibility and Bioactive
Potential of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer: An in Vitro Study. Int. Endod. J. 2022,55, 1066–1080. [CrossRef]
24.
Aksel, H.; Makowka, S.; Bosaid, F.; Guardian, M.G.; Sarkar, D.; Azim, A.A. Effect of Heat Application on the Physical Properties
and Chemical Structure of Calcium Silicate-Based Sealers. Clin. Oral Investig. 2021,25, 2717–2725. [CrossRef]
25.
Hadis, M.; Camilleri, J. Characterization of Heat Resistant Hydraulic Sealer for Warm Vertical Obturation. Dent. Mater.
2020
,36,
1183–1189. [CrossRef]
