Cargando…

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abboud, Khaled M., Abu-Seida, Ashraf M., Hassanien, Ehab E., Tawfik, Hossam M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8045287/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33849516
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01552-w
_version_ 1783678653163372544
author Abboud, Khaled M.
Abu-Seida, Ashraf M.
Hassanien, Ehab E.
Tawfik, Hossam M.
author_facet Abboud, Khaled M.
Abu-Seida, Ashraf M.
Hassanien, Ehab E.
Tawfik, Hossam M.
author_sort Abboud, Khaled M.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8045287
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80452872021-04-14 Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model Abboud, Khaled M. Abu-Seida, Ashraf M. Hassanien, Ehab E. Tawfik, Hossam M. BMC Oral Health Research Article 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. BioMed Central 2021-04-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8045287/ /pubmed/33849516 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01552-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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
Abboud, Khaled M.
Abu-Seida, Ashraf M.
Hassanien, Ehab E.
Tawfik, Hossam M.
Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model
title Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model
title_full Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model
title_fullStr Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model
title_full_unstemmed Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model
title_short Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model
title_sort biocompatibility of neomta plus® versus mta angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8045287/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33849516
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01552-w
work_keys_str_mv AT abboudkhaledm biocompatibilityofneomtaplusversusmtaangelusasdelayedfurcationperforationrepairmaterialsinadogmodel
AT abuseidaashrafm biocompatibilityofneomtaplusversusmtaangelusasdelayedfurcationperforationrepairmaterialsinadogmodel
AT hassanienehabe biocompatibilityofneomtaplusversusmtaangelusasdelayedfurcationperforationrepairmaterialsinadogmodel
AT tawfikhossamm biocompatibilityofneomtaplusversusmtaangelusasdelayedfurcationperforationrepairmaterialsinadogmodel