Cargando…

Comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models

OBJECTIVES: New biomaterials had some advantages such as mixing and easier application as compared to traditional MTA in single step apexification method. This study aimed to compare the three biomaterials used in the apexification treatment of immature molar teeth in terms of the time spent, the qu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kalaoglu, Elif Ece, Duman, Canan, Capan, Belen Sirinoglu, Ocak, Mert, Bilecenoglu, Burak
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10311754/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37391750
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03180-y
_version_ 1785066807363633152
author Kalaoglu, Elif Ece
Duman, Canan
Capan, Belen Sirinoglu
Ocak, Mert
Bilecenoglu, Burak
author_facet Kalaoglu, Elif Ece
Duman, Canan
Capan, Belen Sirinoglu
Ocak, Mert
Bilecenoglu, Burak
author_sort Kalaoglu, Elif Ece
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: New biomaterials had some advantages such as mixing and easier application as compared to traditional MTA in single step apexification method. This study aimed to compare the three biomaterials used in the apexification treatment of immature molar teeth in terms of the time spent, the quality of the canal filling and the number of x-rays taken to complete the process. METHODS: The root canals of the extracted thirty molar teeth were shaped with rotary tools. To obtain the apexification model, ProTaper F3 was used retrograde. The teeth were randomly assigned into three groups based on the material used to seal the apex; Group 1: Pro Root MTA, Group 2: MTA Flow, Group 3: Biodentine. The amounts of the filling, the number of radiographs taken until treatment completion and the treatment duration were recorded. Then teeth were fixed for micro computed tomography imaging for quality evaluation of canal filling. RESULTS: Biodentine was superior to the other filling materials according to time. MTA Flow provided greater filling volume than the other filling materials in the rank comparison for the mesiobuccal canals. MTA Flow had greater filling volume than ProRoot MTA in the palatinal/distal canals(p = 0.039). Biodentine had greater filling volume more than MTA Flow in the mesiolingual/distobuccal canals (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: MTA Flow was found as a suitable biomaterial according to the treatment time and quality of root canal fillings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10311754
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103117542023-07-01 Comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models Kalaoglu, Elif Ece Duman, Canan Capan, Belen Sirinoglu Ocak, Mert Bilecenoglu, Burak BMC Oral Health Research Article OBJECTIVES: New biomaterials had some advantages such as mixing and easier application as compared to traditional MTA in single step apexification method. This study aimed to compare the three biomaterials used in the apexification treatment of immature molar teeth in terms of the time spent, the quality of the canal filling and the number of x-rays taken to complete the process. METHODS: The root canals of the extracted thirty molar teeth were shaped with rotary tools. To obtain the apexification model, ProTaper F3 was used retrograde. The teeth were randomly assigned into three groups based on the material used to seal the apex; Group 1: Pro Root MTA, Group 2: MTA Flow, Group 3: Biodentine. The amounts of the filling, the number of radiographs taken until treatment completion and the treatment duration were recorded. Then teeth were fixed for micro computed tomography imaging for quality evaluation of canal filling. RESULTS: Biodentine was superior to the other filling materials according to time. MTA Flow provided greater filling volume than the other filling materials in the rank comparison for the mesiobuccal canals. MTA Flow had greater filling volume than ProRoot MTA in the palatinal/distal canals(p = 0.039). Biodentine had greater filling volume more than MTA Flow in the mesiolingual/distobuccal canals (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: MTA Flow was found as a suitable biomaterial according to the treatment time and quality of root canal fillings. BioMed Central 2023-06-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10311754/ /pubmed/37391750 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03180-y Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kalaoglu, Elif Ece
Duman, Canan
Capan, Belen Sirinoglu
Ocak, Mert
Bilecenoglu, Burak
Comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models
title Comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models
title_full Comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models
title_fullStr Comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models
title_short Comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models
title_sort comparison of three different biomaterials used in in vitro molar apexification models
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10311754/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37391750
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03180-y
work_keys_str_mv AT kalaogluelifece comparisonofthreedifferentbiomaterialsusedininvitromolarapexificationmodels
AT dumancanan comparisonofthreedifferentbiomaterialsusedininvitromolarapexificationmodels
AT capanbelensirinoglu comparisonofthreedifferentbiomaterialsusedininvitromolarapexificationmodels
AT ocakmert comparisonofthreedifferentbiomaterialsusedininvitromolarapexificationmodels
AT bilecenogluburak comparisonofthreedifferentbiomaterialsusedininvitromolarapexificationmodels