Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35950780›Full record

ArticleInternational endodontic journal2022

Cytocompatibility and bioactive potential of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer: An in vitro study.

José Luis Sanz, Sergio López-García, Francisco Javier Rodríguez-Lozano, María Melo, Adrián Lozano, Carmen Llena, Leopoldo Forner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International endodontic journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

José Luis SanzDepartment d'Estomatologia, Facultat de Medicina I Odontologia, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5438-8085
Sergio López-GarcíaDepartment d'Estomatologia, Facultat de Medicina I Odontologia, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain.
Francisco Javier Rodríguez-LozanoDepartment of Dermatology, Stomatology, Radiology and Physical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Morales Meseguer Hospital, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0623-740X
María MeloDepartment d'Estomatologia, Facultat de Medicina I Odontologia, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain.
Adrián LozanoDepartment d'Estomatologia, Facultat de Medicina I Odontologia, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain.
Carmen LlenaDepartment d'Estomatologia, Facultat de Medicina I Odontologia, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3942-2820
Leopoldo FornerDepartment d'Estomatologia, Facultat de Medicina I Odontologia, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain.
Universitat de València · ESHospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer · ES

Funding

Instituto de Salud Carlos III RD21/0001/0022Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades FPU19/03115
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess the cytocompatibility and bioactive potential of the new calcium silicate cement-based sealer AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer (AHPbcs) on human periodontal ligament stem cells (hPDLSCs) compared with the epoxy resin-based sealer AH Plus (AHP) and the calcium silicate cement-based sealer Endosequence BC Sealer (ESbcs). METHODOLOGY: Standardized sample discs and 1:1, 1:2 and 1:4 eluates of the tested materials were prepared. The following assays were performed: surface element distribution via SEM-EDX, cell attachment and morphology via SEM, cell viability via a MTT assay, cell migration/proliferation via a wound-healing assay, osteo/cemento/odontogenic marker expression via RT-qPCR and cell mineralized nodule formation via Alizarin Red S staining. HPDLSCs were isolated from extracted third molars. Comparisons were made with hPDLSCs cultured in unconditioned (negative control) or osteogenic (positive control) culture media. Statistical significance was established at p < .05.

resultsA higher peak of Ca

conclusionAH Plus Bioceramic Sealer exhibited a significantly higher cytocompatibility and bioactive potential than AH Plus and a similar cytocompatibility to that of Endosequence BC Sealer. Endosequence BC Sealer exhibited a significantly higher mineralization potential than the other tested sealers. The results from this in vitro study act as supporting evidence for the use of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer in root canal treatment.

Indexed as

Root Canal Filling MaterialsCalcium CompoundsEpoxy ResinsHumansMaterials TestingPeriodontal LigamentSilicatesCalcium Compoundsepoxy resin-based root canal sealerEpoxy ResinsRoot Canal Filling MaterialsSilicatesAH Plus Bioceramic SealerAH Plus sealerbioactivitybiocompatibilityEndosequence BC sealer

Identifiers

PMID35950780
PMCPMC9541143
OpenAlexW4288687073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.