ArticleBDJ open2024
Comparative evaluation of sealing ability and adaptation of gel form of MTA to dentinal walls: an in-vitro study.
Article in BDJ open, 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.
- Novel Modifications in Endodontic Bioceramics to Improve their Properties: A Narrative Review.Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran) · 2025Review
- AnJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextMineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) is a calcium silicate-based cement that potentially exhibits improved washout resistance when carboxymethyl chitosan or gelatin is incorporated. Gel-form MTA is a novel mineral trioxide aggregate formulated using construction industry-based technology. The present study was conducted to comparatively evaluate the sealing ability and adaptation to dentinal walls of gel-form MTA. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis in-vitro study consisted of two groups: gel-form MTA and the conventional powder-liquid MTA. 10 samples per group were used for each of the tested parameters. Adaptation of the MTA to the dentinal walls was tested under the light microscope and measured using Image J software. Sealing ability was evaluated using a single aerobic bacterial leakage model. Appropriate statistical analysis was done for the obtained data. Adaptation of the MTA was analyzed using independent t-test and Friedman test, whereas the bacterial leakage was analyzed using chi-square test.
resultsOn comparison of the adaptation property at coronal and apical thirds, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (p = 0.071 and p = 0.638, respectively). However, while comparing the same in the middle one-third of the root, lesser gaps were identified in the gel-form MTA group (p = 0.013). One sample belonging to the conventional powder-liquid MTA group showed significant turbidity during bacteria leakage evaluation (p = 0.001) with the presence of E. faecalis in the count of 10
conclusionThe gel-form MTA shows a better adaptation to the dentinal walls at the middle third of the root and exhibits better sealing ability against bacterial leakage when tested for E. faecalis. The adaptation of gel-form MTA at coronal and apical third of the root was comparable to the conventional powder-liquid MTA.
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.