The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A comparative study of physicochemical properties of AH PlusTM and EpiphanyTM root canal sealants
Abstract
Aim To evaluate setting time, solubility and disintegration, flow, film thickness, and dimensional change following setting in a dual‐cured resin root canal sealer Epiphany TM compared with an epoxy‐resin‐based sealer AH Plus TM. Methodology The experiments were performed according to ANSI/ADA Specification 57 which tests the physicochemical properties of endodontic sealing materials. Five samples of each material were tested for each of the properties. In addition, deionized distilled water from the solubility test of Epiphany TM was submitted for analysis of the cations Fe, Ni, Ca, Mg, Zn, Na, and K in an atomic absorption spectrometer. Three samples were analysed. Results There were no statistical differences (P > 0.05) in flow (AH Plus TM: 38.57 mm; Epiphany TM: 35.74 mm) and film thickness (AH Plus TM: 10.6 μ m; Epiphany TM: 20.1 μ m). The solubility (AH Plus TM: 0.21%; Epiphany TM: 3.41%) and dimensional alterations following setting (AH Plus TM: expansion of 1.3%; Epiphany TM: expansion of 8.1%) were statistically different (P < 0.05). The setting times of both sealants were in accordance with ANSI/ADA requirements. Conclusions Setting time, flow, and film thickness tests for both cements conformed to ANSI/ADA standards. Dimensional alteration test for both cements were greater than values considered acceptable by ANSI/ADA. Epiphany TM values regarding solubility were also greater than values considered acceptable by ANSI/ADA.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Physical Properties of 5 Root Canal Sealers
Zhou, H.-M., Shen, Y., Zheng, W., Li, L., Zheng, Y.-F., & Haapasalo, M. (2013) · Journal of Endodontics · doi:10.1016/j.joen.2013.06.012 · Cited by 502
Barros, J., Silva, M. G., Rodrigues, M. A., Alves, F. R. F., Lopes, M. A., Pina‐Vaz, I., & Siqueira, J. F. (2014) · International Endodontic Journal · doi:10.1111/iej.12207 · Cited by 87
Development of an antibacterial root canal filling system containing MDPB
Kitagawa, R., Kitagawa, H., Izutani, N., Hirose, N., Hayashi, M., & Imazato, S. (2014) · Journal of Dental Research · doi:10.1177/0022034514549808 · Cited by 31
Metadata
- Authors
- Versiani, M. A., Carvalho‐Junior, J. R., Padilha, M. I. A. F., Lacey, S., Pascon, E. A., & Sousa‐Neto, M. D.
- Venue
- International Endodontic Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-05-04
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 464-471
- ISSN
- 0143-2885 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2591
- OpenAlex
- W2019091464
- Cited by
- 208
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparative study of physicochemical properties of AH PlusTM and EpiphanyTM root canal sealants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01105.x
- The paper
- Versiani, M. A., Carvalho‐Junior, J. R., Padilha, M. I. A. F., Lacey, S., Pascon, E. A., & Sousa‐Neto, M. D. (2006). A comparative study of physicochemical properties of AH PlusTM and EpiphanyTM root canal sealants. International Endodontic Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01105.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
