Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33900464›Full record

ArticleJournal of materials science. Materials in medicine2021

Comparison of in vitro biocompatibility and antibacterial activity of two calcium silicate-based materials.

Mingxiang Liu, Lu He, Hongyuan Wang, Wenpei Su, Hong Li

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Expert consensus on intentional tooth replantation.International journal of oral science · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Modern methods and materials used to treat root perforation: effectiveness comparison.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mingxiang LiuDepartment of Endodontics, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, China.
Lu HeAffiliated Stomatology Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, School of Stomatology, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangdong, 510140, China.
Hongyuan WangDepartment of Endodontics, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, China.
Wenpei SuDepartment of Endodontics, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, China.
Hong LiDepartment of Endodontics, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, School of Stomatology, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100050, China. endolihong@qq.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2714-2135

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81500833
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study is aimed at comparing and evaluating the biocompatibility and antibacterial activities of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and iRoot BP Plus as novel retro-filling materials. Discs of both materials were prepared and incubated for 72 h to obtain material extracts in medium. Flow cytometry and the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay were used to assess the rate of apoptosis and proliferation of human periodontal ligament stem cells (hPDLSCs) when exposed to eluates of both materials. The expression levels of alkaline phosphatase, collagen type I, osteocalcin, Runt-related transcription factor-2, and Osterix were tested for evaluating the osteogenic differentiation of hPDLSCs. The antibacterial activities of both materials were compared by the direct contact test. The hPDLSCs stimulated by MTA or iRoot BP Plus eluates showed significantly higher cell viability than that of the control group with no eluates. No significant differences were observed among the percentages of necrotic and apoptotic cells stimulated by MTA and iRoot BP Plus eluates and the control group. The expression of all osteogenic differentiation markers of hPDLSCs in both experimental groups were significantly higher than those of the control group, while the increment values in MTA group were significantly higher than those of the iRoot BP Plus group. The antibacterial activity against Enterococcus faecalis showed no significant difference between MTA and iRoot BP Plus. Therefore, both materials may be suitable for retro-filling applications.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBiocompatible MaterialsCalcium CompoundsCell SurvivalDental CementsEnterococcus faecalisMaterials TestingSilicatesStem CellsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBiocompatible MaterialsCalcium Compoundscalcium silicateDental CementsSilicates

Identifiers

PMID33900464
PMCPMC8076131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.