Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the cytotoxic effects of ProRoot MTA and DiaRoot BA, a bioceramic nanoparticulate cement, on subcutaneous rat tissue. Study Design: Fifty Sprouge Dawley rats were used in this study. Polyethylene tubes filled with ProRoot MTA and DiaRoot BioAggregate, along with a control group of empty, were implanted into dorsal connective tissue of rats for 7, 15, 30, 60, and 90 days. After estimated time intervals the rats were sacrificed. The specimens were fixed, stained with hematoxylin and eosin, and then evaluated under a light microscope for inflammatory reactions and mineralization. Results: All groups evoked a severe to moderate chronic inflammatory reaction at 7 and 15 days, which decreased with time. Both the MTA and BioAggregate groups showed similar inflammatory reactions, except at 90 days when MTA showed statistically significant greater inflammation (p>0.05). The MTA group showed foreign body reaction at all times. Compared to BioAggregate, MTA showed significantly more foreign body reaction at 60 and 90 days (p<0.0001). After 30 days foreign body reaction of BioAggregate decreased significantly. Both MTA and BioAggregate groups showed similar necrosis at 7 and 15 days (p=0.094 and p=0.186 respectively). No necrosis was observed after 15 days. Similarly there was no fibrosis after 30 days for both MTA and BioAggregate groups (p>0.05). Conclusions: Since DiaRoot BioAggregate showed significantly better results than MTA, we can conclude that it is more biocompatible. However, further studies are required to confirm this result. Key words:Biocompatibility, mineral trioxide aggregate, bioAggregate.
Highlights
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) is the most frequently and preferentially used material in dental practice for sealing the communication between root canal system and periodontium
Tantalum pentoxide is used in BA rather than the bismuth oxide used in MTA
T h e r e s u l t s o f a m e ta - a n a ly s is o f M T A b io compatibility showed that MTA is more biocompatible than Super ethoxybenzoic acid (EBA), IRM, and silver amalgam [22]
Summary
Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) is the most frequently and preferentially used material in dental practice for sealing the communication between root canal system and periodontium It is composed of tricalcium and dicalcium silicate, tricalcium aluminate, calcium sulfate (gypsum) [1], and a 4-to-1 addition of bismuth oxide for radiopacity. The materials used to manufacture MTA are certified for being pure and free of heavy metal contamination [2] Despite their similarities, there are two very important differences between MTA and Portland cement. The manufacturer claims that DiaRoot is produced under controlled conditions to form contamination-free biocompatible ceramic nanoparticles (DiaRoot; DiaDent, Burnaby, BC, Canada) It is the first nanoparticulate repair cement introduced on the dental market. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the cytotoxic effect of bioaggregate and mineral trioxide aggregate on subcutaneous connective tissue of rats
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.
