| Abstract: | A prospective clinical and radiographic study was conducted in order to compare Hydron and laterally condensed gutta-percha/AH-26 root canal fillings. Paralleling technique periapical radiographs were taken preoperatively, postoperatively and at recall appointments at post-treatment intervals of 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years and 5 years. Clinical examination at the recall appointments revealed no adverse signs or symptoms amongst all the patients who attended (mean attendance 44.5% at each interval). Radiographs were scored according to the periapical status of the treated root, and comparable bone healing rates were observed between the two root-filling materials. Among the patients attending recall appointments, there were no radiographic signs of failure of any of the 39 gutta-percha/AH-26 root canal fillings. However, three of the 35 canals filled with Hydron were classified as failures, and four required further assessment after the 5-year recall appointment. This study indicated that Hydron and gutta-percha/AH-26 root canal fillings were well accepted but, on the basis of radiographic assessment, success with gutta-percha/AH-26 was more predictable. |
