Article citationsMore >>

Song M, Kim H-C, Lee W, Kim E. Analysis of the cause of failure in nonsurgical endodontic treatment by microscopic inspection during endodontic microsurgery. J Endod. 2011 Nov; 37(11): 1516-9.

has been cited by the following article:

Article

Biocompatibility Assessment of A New MTA Versus Ceramic Based Endodontic Root Canal Sealers

1Associate professor of Dental Biomaterials Faculty of Dentistry Mansoura University, postal code 35516

2Lecturer of Dental Biomaterials Faculty of Dentistry Mansoura University, postal code 35516

3Lecturer of Oral Biology Faculty of Dentistry Mansoura University postal code 35516

4Associate professor of Endodontic Faculty of Dentistry Mansoura University, postal code 35516

5Research intern, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, postal code 35516


International Journal of Dental Sciences and Research. 2020, Vol. 8 No. 2, 35-40
DOI: 10.12691/ijdsr-8-2-2
Copyright © 2020 Science and Education Publishing

Cite this paper:
Noha Abdel-Mawla El-Wassefy, Dina Sami Farahat, Mahitabe Elgamily, Mohamed Ibrahim Salman, Hussein Abdel Hameed El shikha. Biocompatibility Assessment of A New MTA Versus Ceramic Based Endodontic Root Canal Sealers. International Journal of Dental Sciences and Research. 2020; 8(2):35-40. doi: 10.12691/ijdsr-8-2-2.

Correspondence to: Mohamed  Ibrahim Salman, Associate professor of Endodontic Faculty of Dentistry Mansoura University, postal code 35516. Email:

Abstract

Connective tissue response and push-out bond strengths of a new (mineral trioxide aggregate) MTA based endodontic sealer were evaluated.Polyethylene tubes containing ProRoot ES and Endosequence BC sealers were subcutaneously implanted in 45 rats. After 3, 7, 30 days the animals were euthanized, and the specimens were evaluated histologically. Bond strengths of the sealers to root dentine were measured using a push-out bond strength test.Scores of the inflammatory tissue reaction for ProRoot® ES were significantly lower than BC sealer group at 3 days with a thinner fibrous capsule at 30 days. Also, they were not significantly different from the control group. The push-out bond strength of ProRoot® ES could not be evaluated due to handling problems, nevertheless the measured Endosequence BC bond strengths were within an acceptable range.ProRoot® ES had better biocompatibility, seen as more favorable tissue response, than the BC Sealer, although the latter had improved handling characteristics.

Keywords