Comparative analysis of microleakage and seal for 2 obturation materials: Resilon/Epiphany and gutta-percha.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Microleakage continues to be a main reason for failure of root canal therapy, where the challenge has been to achieve an adequate seal between the internal tooth structure and the main obturation material, gutta-percha. The Resilon/Epiphany (R/E) system uses a new obturation material that bonds chemically with the internal tooth structure, thereby decreasing the possibility of microleakage. The purpose of this study was to compare dye leakage in root canals filled with R/E and those in which gutta percha was used. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Pulpectomies were performed on 105 extracted human singlecanal mandibular incisors. The teeth were then randomly divided into 2 groups: 1 was obturated with gutta-percha and the other with R/E. Obturation was performed using the lateral condensation technique. The teeth were then incubated for 10 days, 1 month or 3 months in a heated water bath solution with dye to simulate conditions in the human oral cavity. Teeth were sectioned and examined under dissecting and scanning electron microscopes to assess dye penetration, seal and bonding. RESULTS: Resilon as the main obturation material consistently resulted in less microleakage than gutta-percha at all 3 time intervals. CONCLUSION: The R/E system provides a new material for root canal treatment. R/E creates a chemical bond with the internal tooth structure over the entire root area that is maintained over time, thus representing a better option than gutta-percha. Further studies on R/E will help validate its use and determine its long-term success rates in vivo.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".