A critical analysis of research methods and experimental models to study root canal fillings.

Abstract

Canal filling materials and techniques have been one of the most studied topics in Endodontics. A simple search using the mesh term "root canal filling" in PubMed revealed more than 11000 articles, an impressive number that is much higher than "root canal disinfection" (5544 articles) or even the popular "root canal preparation" (8527 articles). The overriding importance attributed to root filling procedures is not merely intuitive. It derived from the appealing relevance given by the appearance of the white lines in common radiographs grounded on retrospective clinical data that had identified the quality of a root filling as one of the major causes of treatment failure (lack of healing). Since the publication of the Washington study, impressive efforts have been made for the release of new materials and techniques, as well as, for the development of a plethora of laboratory methods to assess the quality of root filling procedures. This narrative review aims to address and discuss the most relevant laboratory methods to assess the root canal filling. As filling quality improvements have not translated into higher success rates, as reported in longitudinal clinical studies, more than to deliver a simple methodology-based review, this paper aims to present an in-depth critical view on the assessment of laboratory methods used to study the filling materials and techniques. Recent data indicate that the long-term dimensional stability/degradation over time of endodontic sealers plays a central role in the treatment outcome. In this context, laboratory methods should be developed focusing on predicting, at least to some degree, the long-term clinical behaviour of root canal fillings, rather than simply ranking different materials or techniques.