ArticleClinical oral investigations2023
Biocompatibility, bioactive potential, porosity, and interface analysis calcium silicate repair cements in a dentin tube model.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of n-Butyl Cyanoacrylate Coating on the Microhardness of MM-MTA After Exposure to Moisture and Human Blood.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Mechanical Signaling in the Microenvironment Regulates the Differentiation of Dental Pulp Stem Cells: A Novel Strategy For Pulp-Dentin Complex Regeneration.Stem cell reviews and reports · 2026Review
- Influence of different final irrigation protocols for removal of photosensitizer activated by ultrasonic device on the bond strength of gutta-percha/bioceramic sealer and fiberglass posts/self-adhesive cement.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
- Physical and surface analysis of calcium silicate Clinker after acid challenge: a micro-CT and SEM study.Brazilian oral research · 2026Article
- Physicochemical properties and periodontal ligament stem cell response to NeoMTA 2.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Physicochemical and antibiofilm properties of new ready-to-use and powder/gel bioceramic endodontic sealers.Brazilian oral research · 2025Article
- Influence of Bioceramic Clinker particle size, radiopacifier, and liquids on their physicochemical properties.Brazilian dental journal · 2025Article
- An Evaluation of the Cytocompatibility of Endodontic Bioceramics in Human Periodontal-Ligament-Derived Cells.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
- Volumetric change of calcium silicate-based repair materials in a simulated inflammatory environment: A micro-computed tomography study.Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics · 2024Article
- Biocompatibility, bioactivity, porosity, and sealer/dentin interface of bioceramic ready-to-use sealers using a dentin-tube model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- In vivo method to evaluate volumetric changes in bioceramic repair materials.Brazilian dental journal · 2024Article
- Effect of pH on the solubility and volumetric change of ready-to-use Bio-C Repair bioceramic material.Brazilian oral research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study is to evaluate biocompatibility, bioactive potential, porosity, and dentin/material interface of Bio-C Repair (BIOC-R), MTA Repair HP (MTAHP), and Intermediate Restorative Material (IRM). MATERIALS AND
methodsDentin tubes were implanted into subcutaneous of rats for 7, 15, 30, and 60 days. Thickness of capsules, number of inflammatory cells (ICs), interleukin-6 (IL-6), osteocalcin (OCN), and von Kossa were evaluated. Porosity and material/dentin interface voids were also analyzed. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's tests (p < 0.05).
resultsIRM capsules were thicker and contained greater ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells at 7 and 15 days. BIOC-R capsules exhibited higher thickness and ICs at 7 days and greater IL-6 at 7 and 15 days than MTAHP (p < 0.05). At 30 and 60 days, no significant difference was observed among the groups. OCN-immunopositive cells, von Kossa-positive, and birefringent structures were observed in BIOC-R and MTAHP. MTAHP exhibited higher porosity and interface voids (p < 0.05).
conclusionsBIOC-R, MTAHP, and IRM are biocompatible. Bioceramics materials demonstrate bioactive potential. MTAHP presented the highest porosity and presence of voids. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: BIOC-R and MTAHP have adequate biological properties. BIOC-R demonstrated lower porosity and presence of voids, which may represent better sealing for its clinical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37014506What 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.