ArticleGalen medical journal2024
Tissue Reaction Elicited by Neosealer Flo, AH 26, and CC Sealer in Rats : Tissue Reaction of CC Sealer.
Article in Galen medical journal, 2024. 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
Background: Since root canal sealers are in contact with periradicular tissues, biocompatibility is one of their most important features. There is no available study about the biocompatibility of NSF and CC Sealer that are newly made bioceramic-based sealers. This study aimed to compare the tissue reaction elicited by NeoSealer Flo (NSF), AH26, and ColdCeramic Sealer (CC sealer) in rats. Materials and Methods: The sealers were mixed and applied in molds to fabricate sealer discs, which were then implanted in the subcutaneous tissue of the backs of 30 healthy adult Albino Wistar rats. Each rat received three sealer discs and the fourth incision site remained empty as a control group. After 7, 30, and 90 days, the rats were sacrificed. Biopsy samples were evaluated regarding the extent and severity of inflammation, angiogenesis, fibroplasia, and infiltration. Data were analyzed in SPSS software using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Tissue reaction to NSF was generally severe and increased up to day 30, but slightly decreased at three months, although it was still severe, and significantly greater than the tissue reaction to other sealer types. After one month, all rats in the NSF group showed foreign body reaction and giant cells around sealer particles; while, foreign body reaction was not seen in other groups. Tissue reaction to CC Sealer and AH26 was not significantly different at any point in time (P0.05) and was the highest on day seven and then decreased up to month three. Conclusion: According to the present results, the CC Sealer appears to be a biocompatible material; however, NSF showed higher severity and extent of inflammation and triggered higher tissue reaction.
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.