Introduction: dental autotransplantation is a conservative therapeutic alternative indicated when implants are contraindicated. Objective: The objective of this report was to describe a clinical case of autotransplantation with application of injected fibrin-rich plasma (i-PRF) and apical sealing with biodentine. Methodology: This clinical case report was used to conduct a descriptive study. Results: A 32-year-old patient was treated in whom the upper left third molar (2.8) was transplanted to the site of the first upper left molar (2.6). Despite the use of i-PRF and the sealing of the dental apex with biodentine, the procedure presented clinical failure. Conclusions: This outcome was associated with persistent gingival inflammation secondary to poor oral hygiene, which favored bacterial colonization of the gingival sulcus and compromised early periodontal reattachment. In addition, the behavior of endodontic sealant cement in a humid environment may have contributed to bacterial microfiltration and the persistence of the inflammatory process. General area of study: Dentistry. Specific area of study: Endodontics. Type of article: Clinical case.

Introduction: apical sealing is a determining factor for the success of endodontic treatment, as it prevents the leakage of fluids and microorganisms into the root canal system. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare apical microfiltration in filled teeth with the sealants AH Plus®, Vioseal® and BioRoot RCS®, with and without the use of gutta-percha cone(s), evaluation by root sections and light microscopy. Methodology: An in vitro experimental study was conducted using 30 human teeth extracted from uniradicular teeth, which were subjected to a standardized protocol of instrumentation and endodontic filling. The samples were randomly divided into six groups (n=5): AH Plus with gutta-percha, AH Plus without gutta-percha, Vioseal with gutta-percha, Vioseal without gutta-percha, BioRoot RCS with gutta-percha, and BioRoot RCS without gutta-percha. Subsequently, the teeth were subjected to a cutting process and evaluated by immersion in 2% methylene blue, recording the penetration of the dye at the apical level. Results: To determine whether the use of gutta-percha cone(s) influences apical microfiltration when different endodontic sealants are used. Conclusions: The apical sealing capacity was related to the intrinsic properties of the endodontic sealant. AH Plus® and Vioseal® showed less apical microfiltration, while BioRoot RCS® showed greater susceptibility to dye penetration and material resorption, with no evident influence of the use of gutta-percha cone(s). General area of study: Dentistry. Specific area of study: Endodontics. Type of article: In vitro experimental research.

Introduction: the success of endodontic treatment depends on multiple factors, such as disinfection of the root canal system, quality of the filling, and coronal rehabilitation, evaluated using clinical and radiographic criteria. However, anatomical, microbiological and procedural variables can influence prognosis, conditioning favorable or unfavorable results in endodontic therapy. Objectives: the objective of this study was to evaluate clinically and radiographically the success and failure of endodontic treatments through a series of clinical cases. Methodology: a retrospective descriptive case series study was conducted in patients treated at the postgraduate course in endodontics at the Catholic University of Cuenca, Ecuador. Treatments included chamber access, biomechanical instrumentation, irrigation with 5.25% sodium hypochlorite, use of intracanal medication with calcium hydroxide in indicated cases, and filling with gutta-percha and sealant cement. In specific situations, retreatments, management of accessory canals, instrumentation of complex anatomies, and use of bioactive materials were performed. Clinical and radiographic follow-up allowed the evolution of periapical lesions to be assessed. Results: the results using quantifiable parameters showed that most cases presented resolution of clinical symptoms and signs of periapical bone repair. Factors such as the location of unidentified ducts, adequate management of complications, and effective disinfection positively influenced the prognosis. However, bacterial persistence and anatomical complexity were associated with unfavorable outcomes. Conclusions: concluding that the success of endodontic treatment requires a comprehensive approach based on accurate diagnosis, anatomical knowledge, adequate protocols, and long-term clinical/radiographic follow-up. General area of study: Dentistry. Specific area of study: Endodontics. Article type: case study.