ArticleCureus2024
Comparative Evaluation of Push-Out Bond Strength of Conventional Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, Biodentine, a Modified Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, and Two Novel Antibacterial-Enhanced Mineral Trioxide Aggregates.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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.
- Comparative Analysis of the Physical Properties of Three Different Tricalcium Silicate Cements: An In Vitro Study.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Histopathological Assessment of Tricalcium Aluminate-free Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and Two Antibacterial Enhanced Mineral Trioxide Aggregates As Pulpotomy Agents in Rat Model.European endodontic journal · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The challenges associated with incorporating antimicrobial agents, such as the potential diminishment of the cement's physical properties, highlight the need for comprehensive evaluations. Balancing antimicrobial efficacy with the maintenance of structural integrity is a crucial aspect of material development. The acknowledgment of cytotoxic properties associated with tricalcium aluminate, a major constituent in conventional mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), is critical in terms of long-term evaluation of treatment procedures. The primary focus of the push-out test is to evaluate the resistance of the tested material to dislodgement. Greater push-out strength implies stronger adhesion between the tested material and the tooth surface. Aim This study aims to evaluate the push-out bond strength of two antibacterial-enhanced MTAs with conventional MTA and Biodentine. Material and methods A total of five materials were tested: a) modified MTA, b) doxycycline-enhanced MTA, c) metronidazole-enhanced MTA, d) conventional MTA, and e) Biodentine. All the materials were mixed based on a predetermined powder:liquid ratio and then carried using a plastic instrument to the desired experimental design. Single-rooted permanent teeth, preferably incisors, were used in the present study. Teeth were embedded vertically in a rubber mold, and sectioning of the tooth was performed. A single operator instrumented the canal space in each slice using Gates-Glidden burs, and the mixed cements were placed in the respective groups and stored for 72 hours. A push-out test was carried out using a universal testing machine. Following the bond failure, the slices were examined under a stereomicroscope to determine the nature of the bond failure. The collected data was subjected to a one-way analysis of variance test, post hoc test, and chi-square test for statistical analysis. Results The mean push-out bond strength was found to be the highest for Biodentine (43.25 ± 0.62 megapascals (MPa)), followed by doxycycline- and metronidazole-enhanced MTAs (39.54 ± 0.65 MPa and 39.29 ± 0.16 MPa, respectively), modified MTA formulation (37.75 ± 0.73 MPa), and the lowest for conventional MTA (25.93 ± 0.7 MPa). Conventional MTA samples had an adhesive failure (89.4%), while Biodentine samples had a cohesive failure (80.3%). Mixed failures were noticed with the samples containing modified MTA formulation (71.3%), doxycycline-enhanced MTA (76.6%), and metronidazole-enhanced MTA (78.0%). Conclusion Despite not surpassing Biodentine in bond strength, antibacterial-enhanced MTAs are considered potential alternatives to conventional MTA in day-to-day clinical practice.
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.