Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40375201›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2025

Penetration of Biodentine, NeoMTA 2, and NeoPUTTY into dentinal tubules in primary tooth pulpotomy: a confocal laser scanning microscopy analysis.

Merve Ozdemir, Aysenur Oncu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors.

Merve OzdemirFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Lokman Hekim University, Ankara, Turkey. merveozdemir@lokmanhekim.edu.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8596-3644
Aysenur OncuFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Endodontics, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3130-0669

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPulpotomy is an accepted treatment option to preserve primary teeth with exposed pulp due to caries or trauma and to ensure proper function until physiologic exfoliation. This study aimed to assess the dentin penetration of NeoMTA 2, NeoPUTTY, and Biodentine using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM).

methodsThe present study was performed using 42 freshly extracted lower primary molars. All samples were divided into 3 separate groups and the Biodentine, NeoMTA 2, and NeoPUTTY were placed on the cavity floor, respectively. High-speed diamond discs were used to create 2-mm-thick sections from the furcation region, including a 1- mm crown and 1-mm root. Primary molar tooth sections were placed on a glass slide and examined using a CLSM (LSM 980, Zeiss, Germany). All images were analyzed using ImageJ/Fiji (National Institute of Health, USA) software for the measurement of penetration depth. The penetration depth of the materials was evaluated using one- way ANOVA, and the Tukey test was used for comparisons between groups at p < 0.05 significance level.

resultsThere was no significant difference in penetration depth between the Biodentine and NeoMTA 2 materials. NeoPUTTY showed higher penetration depth than Biodentine and NeoMTA 2.

conclusionsThis study reported that NeoPUTTY showed higher dentinal tubule penetration in primary teeth than NeoMTA 2 and Biodentine as pulpotomy materials.

Indexed as

Calcium CompoundsDentinPulp Capping and Pulpectomy AgentsPulpotomySilicatesTooth, DeciduousHumansMicroscopy, ConfocalMolarCalcium CompoundsPulp Capping and Pulpectomy AgentsSilicatestricalcium silicateCalcium silicate-based materialsConfocal laser scanning microscopyPulpotomy

Identifiers

PMID40375201
PMCPMC12083007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.