The current study aimed to compare the pH, solubility value, and ion release capability of premixed mineral trioxide aggregates (MTAs) versus conventional pulp capping materials before and after setting. The following materials were used: resin-modified calcium silicate cement (TheraCal LC^®, TLC), resin-modified calcium hydroxide cement (Ultra-Blend^TM plus, UBP), and 2 kinds of premixed MTA (Endocem MTA^® premixed regular 〔EMPR〕 and Well-Root^TM PT 〔WRP〕). The specimens of each material were prepared before and after setting and were immersed in distilled water. The materials’ pH and solubility value were assessed. Next, three kinds of ion (calcium, sulfide, and strontium) released by pulp capping materials were evaluated via inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry. In the after-setting group, the pH of TLC and UBP decreased. However, the pH of the premixed MTAs increased with time. TLC released a higher concentration of strontium ion compared with the other materials. Meanwhile, EMPR released a significantly high concentration of sulfide ion (<i>p</i> < 0.05). In the after-setting group, the 2 kinds of premixed MTAs released a significantly higher concentration of calcium ion compared with the other materials (<i>p</i> < 0.05). In the after-setting group, EMPR had a significantly low solubility value (<i>p</i> < 0.05). The Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by the Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction, was used in statistical analysis. In conclusion, resin-modified calcium silicate cement, modified calcium hydroxide cement, and the 2 kinds of premixed MTAs had an alkaline pH and low solubility value and they released various concentrations of ions after setting.

This study aimed to compare the physical properties of 4 kinds of calcium silicatebased cements (CSCs): 2 kinds of powder-liquid mix type (RetroMTA^® [RTMX] and Endocem^® MTA Zr [EZMX]) and 2 kinds of premixed type (Well-Root^™PT [WRPR] and Endocem^® MTA premixed [ECPR]) CSCs, respectively. Further, we assessed the setting times, solubility values, and compressive strengths of the cements. The shortest setting time was observed for EZMX (123.33 ± 5.77 seconds), followed by RTMX (146.67 ± 5.77 seconds), ECPR (260.00 ± 17.32 seconds), and WRPR (460.00 ± 17.32 seconds), respectively. The highest solubility was observed for WRPR (9.01 ± 0.55%), followed by RTMX (2.17 ± 0.07%), EZMX (0.55 ± 0.03%), and ECPR (0.17 ± 0.03%). Furthermore, the highest compressive strength was observed for ECPR (76.67 ± 25.67 Mpa), followed by WRPR (38.39 ± 7.25 Mpa), RTMX (35.07 ± 5.34 Mpa), and EZMX (4.07 ± 0.60 Mpa). In conclusion, the premixed type CSCs (WRPR and ECPR) exhibited longer setting times compared to the powder-liquid mix type CSCs (EZMX and RTMX). The solubility test showed that ECPR had the lowest solubility while WRPR had the highest solubility, with a statistically significant difference between them (<i>p</i> < 0.0083). Additionally, the compressive strength test showed that ECPR had the highest compressive strength, while EZMX had the lowest compressive strength, also with a statistically significant difference between them (<i>p</i> < 0.0083). ECPR is a promising material as it is premixed, eliminating the need for mixing time, and it has also demonstrated improved solubility and compressive strength, making it a potentially favorable option for clinical use.

Calcium silicate-based cement (CSC) is a pharmaceutical agent that is widely used in dentistry. This bioactive material is used for vital pulp treatment due to its excellent biocompatibility, sealing ability, and antibacterial activity. Its drawbacks include a long setting time and poor maneuverability. Hence, the clinical properties of CSC have recently been improved to decrease its setting time. Despite the widespread clinical usage of CSC, there is no research comparing recently developed CSCs. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to compare the physicochemical, biological, and antibacterial properties of four commercial CSCs: two powder–liquid mix types (RetroMTA® [RETM]; Endocem® MTA Zr [ECZR]) and two premixed types (Well-Root™ PT [WRPT]; Endocem® MTA premixed [ECPR]). Each sample was prepared using circular Teflon molds, and tests were conducted after 24 h of setting. The premixed CSCs exhibited a more uniform and less rough surface, higher flowability, and lower film thickness than the powder–liquid mix CSCs. In the pH test, all CSCs showed values between 11.5 and 12.5. In the biological test, cells exposed to ECZR at a concentration of 25% showed greater cell viability, but none of the samples showed a significant difference at low concentration (p > 0.05). Alkaline phosphatase staining revealed that cells exposed to ECZR underwent more odontoblast differentiation than the cells exposed to the other materials; however, no significant difference was observed at a concentration of 12.5% (p > 0.05). In the antibacterial test, the premixed CSCs showed better results than the powder–liquid mix CSCs, and ECPR yielded the best results, followed by WRPT. In conclusion, the premixed CSCs showed improved physical properties, and of the premixed types, ECPR exhibited the highest antibacterial properties. For biological properties, none of these materials showed significant differences at 12.5% dilution. Therefore, ECPR may be a promising material with high antibacterial activity among the four CSCs, but further investigation is needed for clinical situations.