Biocompatibility of mineral trioxide aggregate and biodentine as root-end filling materials: an in vivo study.

This study evaluated the biocompatibility of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and Biodentine (BD) as root-end filling materials. Six mongrel dogs were divided into two equal groups according to the evaluation period; group A: one month and group B: three months. Three premolars of the same quadrant in each arch were used, summing up 36 teeth (6 teeth/dog). These teeth were randomly subdivided into three subgroups according to the root-end filling material used: MTA, BD and no root-end filling material (control). Endodontic access cavities were performed for induction of periapical pathosis. After the infection period, root canal instrumentation and obturation were accomplished. One day after root canal procedures, root-end surgery was performed. Surgical access was achieved and the root-end was resected approximately 3 mm above the apex. Root-end cavity was prepared ultrasonically and filled with the tested materials. All samples were evaluated by radiography and histopathology (Inflammation and new hard tissue formation). Data were collected and subjected to statistical analysis. In group A, MTA subgroup exhibited significant higher mean inflammatory score than BD subgroup (P < 0.05) while no significant difference was recorded between MTA and BD subgroups in group B (P > 0.05). Regarding mean mineralization score, there was no significant difference between all subgroups in both groups A and B (P > 0.05). Biodentine exhibited favorable biocompatibility in the initial stage of healing than MTA and comparable biomineralization. Clinical relevance: Biodentine could be considered as an acceptable alternative to MTA in peri-radicular surgeries.

Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model.

BACKGROUND: The biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® (Avlon BioMed Inc., Bradenton, Fl) as a furcal perforation repair material is not fully understood. This study compares the biocompatibility of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA Angelus) and NeoMTA Plus® as delayed furcation perforation repair materials. METHODS: Pulpotomy and root canal obturation were performed in 72 premolars in six mongrel dogs and then a standardized furcal perforation was performed. The coronal access was left open for three weeks. After curetting, cleaning and drying of the perforations, these teeth were divided into three equal groups (N = 24 teeth/ 2 dogs each) according to the material used for perforation repair; group I: NeoMTA Plus®, group II: MTA Angelus and group III: no material (positive control). The coronal access cavities were sealed with a filling material. The inflammatory cell count and qualitative pathology (presence of calcific bridge, configuration of fibrous tissue formed, examination of tissue surrounding the furcation area, histology of intraradicular bone and the inflammatory nature of tissues) were carried out after one week (subgroup A, N = 8 teeth), one month (subgroup B, N = 8 teeth) and three months (subgroup C, N = 8 teeth). The inflammatory cell count was expressed as mean ± SD and statistically analyzed. P-value < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In all subgroups, the control group exhibited the highest number of inflammatory cell count, followed by MTA Angelus group and the least inflammatory cell count was shown by NeoMTA Plus® group. There was a significant difference in the inflammatory cell count between the NeoMTA Plus® and MTA Angelus after one week (P < 0.05) while no significant differences were recorded between them after one month and three months (P > 0.05). In contrast to group II, there was no significant differences in inflammatory cell count between the subgroups in groups I and III (P > 0.05). NeoMTA Plus® exhibited better qualitative pathological features than MTA Angelus after one week and nearly similar features after one month and three months of repair. CONCLUSION: NeoMTA Plus® has a better early biocompatibility than MTA Angelus after one week of delayed furcation perforation repair and a similar late biocompatibility after one month and three months.

Sealing ability of Biodentine versus ProRoot mineral trioxide aggregate as root-end filling materials.

AIM: This study evaluated the sealing ability of ProRoot MTA and Biodentine as root-end filling materials. METHOD: In total, twenty (N = 20) extracted human maxillary central incisor teeth were decontaminated, cleaned and decoronated. Instrumentation was performed according to the step back technique using #50 Flex-o-file. Then the canals were flared to #70 Flex-o-file. Obturation was performed with conventional gutta percha and a resinous sealer (AH26) using the lateral condensation technique. Resection of 3 mm of apical end of each root was achieved perpendicular to the long axis of the root. Root-end cavity was prepared in each sample ultrasonically then filled with tested materials (N = 10). Fluid filtration method was used to assess the sealing ability of each tested material at three different experimental periods; one day, one week and one month after setting. All data were tabulated and statistically analyzed with a level of significance set at P ≤ .05. RESULTS: At each specific time interval, the leakage mean values were not consistent among the tested materials. At one day interval, ProRoot MTA samples had a higher leakage mean value than Biodentine samples. However, this difference in leakage was not statistically significant (P > .05). At one week interval, both materials showed an increased degree of leakage mean value with no significant difference (P > .05). At one month interval, ProRoot MTA samples showed a decrease in leakage mean value, while the Biodentine samples showed a further increase in leakage mean value. This difference was statistically significant (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Although the sealing ability of ProRoot MTA is superior to Biodentine, Biodentine could be considered as an acceptable alternative to ProRoot MTA in peri-radicular surgeries.