Abstract
Aim: The aim of the present in vivo study was to determine bone tissue reaction to calcium enriched mixture (CEM) and mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) using a rat femur model. Study Design: Sixty-three rats were selected and randomly divided into three groups of 21 each [experimental groups (n=15), control (n=6)]. Implantation cavities were prepared in each femoral bone and randomly filled with the biomaterials only in the experimental groups. The animals in three groups were sacrificed 1, 4, and 8 weeks postoperatively. Histologic evaluations comprising inflammation severity and new bone formation were blindly made on H&E-stained decalcified 6-µm sections. Results: At 1, 4, and 8 weeks after implantation number of inflammatory cells had decreased in the CEM, MTA and control groups, respectively, with no statistically significant differences. Conversely, new bone formation had increased in all the experimental and control groups, without statistically significant differences. Conclusion: The results suggest that biocompatibility of MTA, as gold standard, and CEM cement as a new endodontic biomaterial are comparable Key words:Endodontics, MTA,CEM, osseous reaction.
Highlights
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) has many of the characteristics of an ideal biomaterial for various endodontic treatments
It is necessary for an endodontic material to be biocompatible, which is especially important for root-end filling materials such as MTA and calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement
A metaanalysis is made of filler materials in periapical surgery, evaluating a total of 30 articles published in recent years, have shown that MTA appears to be an ideal material [21], which is consistent with the results of the present study
Summary
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) has many of the characteristics of an ideal biomaterial for various endodontic treatments. MTA was introduced in 1993 as a root-end filling material [1] It is a mixture of calcium phosphate, calcium oxide, silicate and bismuth oxide [2]. MTA exhibits proper biocompatibility in the proximity of pulp and periapical tissues (3-7.); it is superior to other materials used for perforation repair and rootend filling [8]. CEM is a tooth-colored water-based cement with similar clinical applications as MTA, but with different chemical composition [12] and has exhibited proper sealing ability [9], antimicrobial properties similar to those of calcium hydroxide [13], hard tissue induction properties [14] and shorter setting time, greater flowability and lower film thickness compared to MTA [12]. Since no studies to date have evaluated the osseous reaction to CEM, the aim of the present in vivo study was to evaluate the bone tissue reaction of rat femur to CEM and compare it with those of MTA
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
