Long-term results of amalgam versus glass ionomer cement as apical sealant after apicectomy

• Published in: Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology and endodontics Vol. 79; no. 1; pp. 101 - 103
• Main Authors: Jesslén, Per, Zetterqvist, Lars, Heimdahl, Anders
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Mosby, Inc 1995
• Subjects: Aluminum Silicates; Apicoectomy; Dental Amalgam; Dentistry; Follow-Up Studies; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans; Medicin och hälsovetenskap; Retrograde Obturation - methods; Root Canal Filling Materials; Treatment Outcome
• ISSN: 1079-2104; 1528-395X
• DOI: 10.1016/S1079-2104(05)80082-4

A total of 67 teeth in 64 patients were treated with apicectomy and retrograde fillings. They were randomized to receive fillings of amalgam or glass ionomer cement in a comparative clinical study. Healing was evaluated clinically and radiographically after 1 and 5 years. Evaluation showed no difference in healing capacity between the two materials. Overall success rates in both groups were registered as 90% at 1 year and 85% at 5 years. Contamination with blood or saliva during insertion of the filling material did not affect healing adversely. The study shows that the 5-year follow-up result can be predicted in more than 95% of the cases at the 1-year follow-up. It can be concluded that glass ionomer cement is a valid alternative to amalgam as an apical sealant after apicectomy with equally good long-term clinical results.