ArticleBMC oral health2026
Evaluation of marginal adaptation and bond strength of apical root canal plugs using different bioceramic cements.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApexification in immature teeth represents a clinical challenge due to the difficulty of achieving an effective apical seal and sufficient mechanical resistance. Bioceramic materials such as MTA Repair HP, Bio-C Repair, Biodentine, and PBS Cimmo HP have been developed to improve sealing ability and bond strength. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare, in vitro, the apical marginal adaptation by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and bond strength through the push-out test of these four calcium silicate- based cements used as an apical barrier.
methodsForty simulated models of immature teeth with open apex were created. The specimens were divided into four groups to create an apical plug: G1 (MTA Repair HP), G2 (Bio-C Repair), G3 (Biodentine) and G4 (Cimmo HP). The apical portion of the specimens was sectioned, into2.5 mm slices. The adaptation of the apical barrier was assessed using SEM and the bond strength was evaluated by the push-out test. Data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (p < 0.05).
resultsMTA Repair HP showed significantly better marginal adaptation compared to Cimmo HP (p < 0.05), while no statistical difference were found among the other materials. In contrast, PBS Cimmo HP exhibited the highest bond strength, significantly superior to Bio-C Repair (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found among the other materials. Both MTA Repair HP and Biodentine demonstrated consistent performance in both tests. Adhesive fracture was the most frequent type of failure observed across all materials.
conclusionMTA Repair HP, provided superior marginal adaptation, favoring its indication for apical sealing and prevention of leakage. Conversely, Cimmo HP, with its higher compressive strength, may be better suited for cases requiring greater mechanical resistance. Understanding the distinct properties of these materials assists clinicians in selecting the most appropriate bioceramic cement for apexification 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.