Analysis of the healing response to gutta-percha and Diaket when used as root-end filling materials in periradicular surgery.

AIM To analyse the healing response to gutta-percha and Diaket when used as root-end filling materials in periradicular surgery. METHODOLOGY Periradicular surgery was completed using the mandibular second, third and fourth premolar teeth from nine male mongrel dogs. The six roots on one side of the mouth were randomly allocated to one of the following groups: group A: a resected root end and a burnished gutta-percha root filling; group B: cavities were prepared to a depth of 4.0 mm, using ultrasonic root-end preparation and filled with Diaket. The response was evaluated histologically at 55 (nine specimens) and 150 (three specimens) days post operatively. RESULTS The data for the 55-day period was analysed statistically using Wilcoxon's Signed Ranks test. No statistical analysis was carried out on the 150-day group due to the small number of specimens. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05. No statistical significance was observed in the healing response between Diaket and gutta-percha in the following categories at 55 days: inflammatory response, angiogenesis, root-end resorption, and cementum deposition. Statistically significant differences were observed in the healing categories: bone apposition (P < 0.05) and periodontal ligament formation (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS At both time intervals, Diaket had a better healing response that was characterized by hard tissue formation adjacent to the root-end filling material bordered by occasional multinucleated giant cells. The nature of both the hard tissue formation and the adjacent cells, however, remains undetermined. Diaket displayed the best healing of either material used in this study.