ArticleScientific reports2020
Immunoinflammatory response and bioactive potential of GuttaFlow bioseal and MTA Fillapex in the rat subcutaneous tissue.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dentine Regeneration With Calcium Strontium Silicate: In Vitro Odontogenic Differentiation, Antimicrobial Activity, Immunomodulation and In Vivo Pulpotomy in Rat Molars.International endodontic journal · 2026Article
- Antithrombotic and antibacterial surface coating based on spiky silver nanoparticles: A counterattack against clotting and biofilm.Materials today. Bio · 2026Article
- Does radiotherapy compromise root canal sealer penetration? An in vitro confocal laser microscopy study.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Histological and immunohistochemical analysis of human periapical lesions: a study of TGF-β1 and CD68 markers.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Biocompatibility and bioactivity of bioceramic endodontic sealer: NeoSealer Flo.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2025Article
- Bioactive potential of Bio-C Temp demonstrated by systemic mineralization markers and immunoexpression of bone proteins in the rat connective tissue.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2024Article
- Remineralization ability of different root canal sealers.The Saudi dental journal · 2023Article
- Sol-Gel Technologies to Obtain Advanced Bioceramics for Dental Therapeutics.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Multifunctional and biodegradable methacrylated gelatin/Aloe vera nanofibers for endodontic disinfection and immunomodulation.Biomaterials advances · 2023Article
- Immunomodulatory Effects of Endodontic Sealers: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2023Review
- In vivo cytotoxicity analysis of bioceramic root canal sealers on zebrafish embryo.Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects · 2023Article
- Efficacy of Reciprocating Instruments in Retreatment of Bioactive and Resin-Based Root Canal Sealers.Acta stomatologica Croatica · 2022Article
- Bioactivity Potential of Bioceramic-Based Root Canal Sealers: A Scoping Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Hepatic enzymes and immunoinflammatory response to Bio-C Temp bioceramic intracanal medication implanted into the subcutaneous tissue of rats.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Bone repair in defects filled with AH Plus sealer and different concentrations of MTA: a study in rat tibiae.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2021Article
- Biocompatibility and bioactive potential of the NeoMTA Plus endodontic bioceramic-based sealer.Restorative dentistry & endodontics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the effect of GuttaFlow bioseal (GFB) and MTA Fillapex (MTAF) in comparison with Endofill (EF) in the subcutaneous tissue. Polyethylene tubes with GFB, MTAF, EF or empty tubes (control group; CG) were implanted into subcutaneous of rats. After 7, 15, 30 and 60 days, the capsule thickness, inflammatory reaction, interleukin-6 (IL-6), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), caspase-3, TUNEL-positive cells, von Kossa and ultrastructural features were evaluated. The data were statistically analyzed (p ≤ 0.05). At all periods, the number of IL-6- and VEGF-immunolabelled cells, and capsule thickness were lower in GFB than MTAF, which was lower than EF (p < 0.0001). At 60 days, the number of inflammatory cells was similar in GFB and MTAF (p = 0.58). Significant differences in the number of TUNEL- and caspase-3-positive cells were not observed among GFB, MTAF and CG whereas the highest values were found in EF specimens. The EF specimens exhibited several cells with condensed chromatin, typical of apoptosis. von Kossa-positive and birefringent structures were only observed in GFB and MTAF, suggesting the presence of calcite crystals. Taken together, these results show that cellular and structural damage induced by GFB and MTAF sealers were recovery over time. Moreover, these sealers express bioactive potential in subcutaneous tissue.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.