[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-465985-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-465985-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","percentage-of-gutta-percha-filled-areas-in-canals-obturated-by-two-different-core-techniques-with-endodontic-bioceramics-sealer","Percentage of Gutta-Percha-Filled Areas in Canals Obturated by Two Different Core Techniques with Endodontic Bioceramics Sealer","","Preliminary comparative research evaluates two core-carrier obturation techniques—GuttaFusion (GF) and SoftCore (SC)—combined with the bioceramic sealer NeoSealer Flo to determine how effectively simulated root canals are filled. Eight standardized resin models of maxillary first molars were prepared, with obturation limited to the P and DV canals. Cross-sections at 1 and 3 mm from the apex quantified gutta-percha filled area, sealer filled area, and void area. GF produced higher gutta-percha filled area and lower sealer filled area than SC at 1 mm, while SC showed slightly more voids; at 3 mm gutta-percha filled area increased for both. Descriptive statistics only.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/","Healthcare",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/percentage-of-gutta-percha-filled-areas-in-canals-obturated-by-two-different-core-techniques-with-endodontic-bioceramics-sealer/465985/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/percentage-of-gutta-percha-filled-areas-in-canals-obturated-by-two-different-core-techniques-with-endodontic-bioceramics-sealer/465985.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Bintang","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-30",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",9,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the aim of the preliminary study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To compare two core-carrier obturation techniques (GuttaFusion and SoftCore) used with a bioceramic sealer and assess their ability to fill simulated root canals.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Which canals and measurement positions were evaluated?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Obturated canals were the P and DV canals, and cross-sections were taken at 1 mm and 3 mm from the apex for area quantification.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How did GuttaFusion and SoftCore perform at 1 mm from the apex?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"GuttaFusion showed higher gutta-percha filled area and lower sealer filled area than SoftCore, while SoftCore presented slightly higher void area.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},465985,1791363197,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,110,115,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":107,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":55,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},962085564381,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","Communication  \nPercentage of Gutta-Percha-Filled Areas in Canals Obturated by Two Different Core Techniques with Endodontic  \nBioceramics Sealer  \nAntonio Libonati 1,2, Danilo Marroni 2, Giulio Barbalace 2, *, Giulia Campanella 2 and Vincenzo Campanella 3  \nAcademic Editor: Qingsong Yu  \nReceived: 9 November 2025  \nRevised: 16 December 2025  \nAccepted: 18 December 2025  \nPublished: 21 December 2025  \nCopyright: © 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.  \n1 Dental School, Catholic University of Our Lady of Good Counsel, 1000 Tirana, Albania; antlib76@libero.it  \n2 Dental School, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, 00133 Rome, Italy; [danilo96m@gmail.com](danilo96m@gmail.com) (D.M.); [giulia.campanella@students.uniroma2.eu](giulia.campanella@students.uniroma2.eu) (G.C.)  \n3 Department of Clinical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Dental School, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, 00133 Rome, Italy; [vincenzo.campanella@uniroma2.it](vincenzo.campanella@uniroma2.it)  \n* Correspondence: [giuliobarbalace@gmail.com](giuliobarbalace@gmail.com)  \nAbstract  \nThe aim of this preliminary study was to compare two core-carrier obturation techniques—GuttaFusion (GF) and SoftCore (SC)—used in combination with a bioceramic sealer (NeoSealer Flo), and to evaluate their ability to fill simulated root canals. Eight standardized resin models of maxillary first molars were used, and only the P and DV canals of each model were obturated. Cross-sections were obtained at 1 mm and 3 mm from the apex, and the percentage areas occupied by gutta-percha (PGFA), sealer (PSFA), and voids (VA) were measured. This study provides novel comparative data on the performance of these two carrier-based techniques when used with a bioceramic sealer. GF showed higher PGFA and lower PSFA compared with SC at 1 mm from the apex, while SC presented slightly higher VA. At 3 mm, PGFA increased for both techniques. Descriptive statistics (means and percentage values) were calculated; no inferential statistical analysis was performed due to the preliminary nature of the study and the limited sample.  \nKeywords: core technique; SoftCore; GuttaFusion; bioceramic sealer; gutta-percha; sealer; obturation system  \n1. Introduction  \nDespite the variety of obturation techniques available, achieving an optimal balance among gutta-percha, sealer, and voids remains a central objective in endodontic therapy [1–3] . Carrier-based systems such as SoftCore and GuttaFusion have been introduced to enhance three-dimensional canal filling through the use of thermoplasticized gutta-pecha supported by different core materials. However, although several studies have evaluated the performance of these systems, limited evidence is available on their behavior when used in combination with modern bioceramic sealers [4–6] . In particular, the interaction between the carrier material, the viscosity and flow characteristics of the bioceramic sealer, and the resulting distribution of gutta-percha, sealer, and voids has not yet been fully clarified under standardized canal conditions [7–10] .  \nBased on these considerations, this preliminary study aims to compare the SoftCore and GuttaFusion obturation systems, both used in combination with a bioceramic sealer (NeoSealer Flo), to assess their effectiveness in minimizing excess sealer and optimizing the percentage of gutta-percha filled areas [11–17] . This preliminary study aims to explore  \nwhether the different core materials and thermal properties of SoftCore and GuttaFusion are associated with observable variations in the percentages of gutta-percha, sealer, and void areas at 1 mm and 3 mm from the apex [18] . These apical levels are clinically relevant because proper filling in the final millimeters of the canal is essential to ensure an effective apical seal and reduce the risk of microleakage [19–21]","cbCaievetSkbKlGU","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaievetSkbKlGU","pdf",1765961,"English","# Abstract\n# Keywords\n# Introduction\n# Materials and Methods","[{\"question\":\"What is the aim of the preliminary study?\",\"answer\":\"To compare two core-carrier obturation techniques (GuttaFusion and SoftCore) used with a bioceramic sealer and assess their ability to fill simulated root canals.\"},{\"question\":\"Which canals and measurement positions were evaluated?\",\"answer\":\"Obturated canals were the P and DV canals, and cross-sections were taken at 1 mm and 3 mm from the apex for area quantification.\"},{\"question\":\"How did GuttaFusion and SoftCore perform at 1 mm from the apex?\",\"answer\":\"GuttaFusion showed higher gutta-percha filled area and lower sealer filled area than SoftCore, while SoftCore presented slightly higher void area.\"}]","Percentage of Gutta-Percha-Filled Areas in Canals Obturated by Two Different Core Techniques with Endodontic Bioceramics Sealer | PDF",1790770372,23]