ArticleAustralian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc2026
Biological and Mechanical Comparison of Eggshell-Derived Hydroxyapatite, Calcium Hydroxide, and Mineral Trioxide Aggregate.
Article in Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
This study compared the mechanical properties of eggshell-derived hydroxyapatite (ESDHA), mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), and calcium hydroxide (CH), and evaluated their cytotoxicity using human dental pulp stem cells (HDPSCs). Cement samples were prepared and incubated at 37°C under humid conditions. Cytotoxicity was assessed using extracts collected at different setting periods, followed by real-time cell analysis. Compressive strength was measured at multiple time points. Structural and chemical characterisation was performed using X-ray diffractometry, Raman spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and energy-dispersive spectroscopy. ESDHA and MTA showed no cytotoxic effects, whereas CH exhibited initial cytotoxicity with a doubling time of 42.32 ± 1.69 h on day 1. MTA demonstrated the highest compressive strength (85.6 ± 3.2 MPa at 28 days), followed by ESDHA (18.9 ± 1.4 MPa), while CH had the lowest strength (5.1 ± 0.4 MPa). ESDHA appears to be a promising, cost-effective alternative with favourable cytocompatibility but requires mechanical improvement.
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.