ArticleBMC oral health2023
Evaluation of bacterial leakage and marginal adaptation of the bioceramics pulp dressing materials: an invitro study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of sealing ability, antibacterial effect and marginal adaptation of bioactive materials in pulpotomized primary molars: an in-vitro study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Marginal adaptation of customized gutta percha cone with calcium silicate based sealer versus MTA and biodentine apical plugs in simulated immature permanent teeth (an in vitro study).BMC oral health · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the sealing ability and marginal adaptation of three calcium silicate-based cement (Biodentine, Pro root MTA, MTA Angelus) using a bacterial leakage model and scanning electron microscope (SEM).
methodsRecently extracted lower first premolars were randomly categorized into three experimental groups (n = 15 samples), positive control (n = 5 samples), and negative control group (n = 5 sample). Samples from the experimental groups and positive control group were subject to cavity Class I occlusal preparation followed by modified coronal pulpotomy. Different types of bioceramic dressing material were placed in 3 mm thickness accordingly, group 1 (Biodentine), group 2 (MTA Angelus), and group 3 (ProRoot MTA). No dressing material was placed in the positive control group (group 4). All samples were placed in the incubator for 24 h at 37℃, 100% humidity, for the materials to be completely set. The final restoration was placed using the Z350 resin composite. A double layer of nail varnish was applied over all the sample surfaces except the occlusal site. Whereas the samples' surfaces in the negative control, were completely covered. A 3 mm length was measured from the root apex of the samples from each group, before proceeding with the resection. The bacterial leakage test was performed using Enterococcus faecalis TCC 23,125, and a sample from each experimental group was randomly chosen for SEM. Data analysis was conducted under the One-way ANOVA test, completed by Tukey's post hoc test.
resultsThere is a significant difference in sealing ability and marginal adaptation between the groups. (p < 0.05). The study showed that Pro Root MTA had the superior sealing ability and marginal adaptation compared to Biodentine and MTA Angelus.
conclusionThe ProRoot MTA as a coronal pulpotomy pulp dressing material, was found to have a better marginal adaptation and sealing ability compared to three other bioceramics materials. The material would be the better choice during clinical settings and procedures.
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.