Properties of Tricalcium Silicate Sealers

Khalil, Issam; Naaman, Alfred; Camilleri, Josette

doi:10.1016/j.joen.2016.06.002

Cited by 127 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These efficiencies are clinically favourable characteristics and their mechanical advantages are proved in previous studies (11,32). According to the manufacturers' introduction of brand new shaping instruments such as Self Adjusting File (ReDent Nova, Ra'anana, Israel), TruShape (Dentsply Tulsa Dental Specialities) and XP endo-Shaper (FKG, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland), these brand new instruments were developed to preserve natural canal shape as much as possible to keep root dentin integrity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Efficacy and retrievability of root canal filling using calcium silicate‐based and epoxy resin‐based root canal sealers with matched obturation techniques

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to compare the efficiency of root canal filling procedures and the retrievability of the filling material with various sealers. Forty-three patients assigned to endodontic treatment with (i) continuous wave of condensation technique (CTW) with AH-plus (ii) single-cone technique (SCT) with EndoSeal MTA. The spent time, voids entrapping and postoperative symptoms were evaluated. To evaluate the retrievability, mandibular premolar (n = 60) were divided into four groups: AH-plus/CTW, EndoSeal MTA/ SCT, MTA Fillapex/SCT and EndoSequence BC Sealer/SCT. The time required removing the filled materials and remnant score were examined. EndoSeal MTA/SCT showed significantly shorter time of filling procedure. The number of void did not show significant differences between two techniques. No patients showed clinical signs during the follow-up periods. There were no significant differences between group AH-plus and EndoSeal MTA for remnant score. A certain calcium silicate-based sealer with SCT may give similar clinical efficiencies as much as continuous-wave technique using AH-plus sealer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Efficacy and retrievability of root canal filling using calcium silicate‐based and epoxy resin‐based root canal sealers with matched obturation techniques

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The opacifier however varies between them (zirconium oxide in MTA Angelus but tantalum oxide in NeoMTA Plus) as detected in XRD. Recently, the biocompatible zirconium or tantalum is added to the root repair materials as radiopacifier instead of barium sulfate to eliminate the coronal tooth discoloration [33]. Other elements as sulfur, indicating the presence of gypsum (calcium sulfate) phase of Portland cement [1], have also been detected from EDX.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemistry and Bioactivity of NeoMTA Plus™ versus MTA Angelus® Root Repair Materials

Zeid

Alamoudi

Khafagi³

et al. 2017

Journal of Spectroscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. To analyse the chemistry and bioactivity of NeoMTA Plus in comparison with the conventional root repair materials. Method and Materials. Unhydrated and hydrated (initial and final sets) materials were analysed by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction (XRD). For bioactivity study, small holes of dentin discs were filled with either materials, immersed in PBS for 15 days, and analysed with FTIR and scanning electron microscope with energy dispersive X-ray (SEM/EDX). The calculation of crystallinity and carbonate/phosphate (CO 3 /PO 4 ) ratio of surface precipitates (from FTIR) and calcium/phosphate (Ca/P) ratio (from EDX) was statistically analysed using t-test or ANOVA, respectively, at 0.05 significance. Results. Both materials are tricalcium silicate-based that finally react to be calcium silicate hydrate. NeoMTA Plus has relatively high aluminium and sulfur content, with tantalum oxide as an opacifier instead of zirconium oxide in MTA Angelus. NeoMTA Plus showed better apatite formation, higher crystallinity and Ca/P but lower CO 3 /PO 4 ratio than MTA Angelus. SEM showed globular structure with a small particle size in NeoMTA Plus while spherical structure with large particle size in MTA Angelus. Conclusion. Due to fast setting, higher crystallinity, and better bioactivity of NeoMTA Plus, it can be used as a pulp and root repair material.

show abstract

“…The ST is an initial test of the sealers and could serve as a parameter for other tests; results may vary according to the components and particle size of the tested material, ambient temperature, and RH. 3,18,24,25,26,27 The DC test showed higher values for GutaFlow 2 (−26.06% ± 1.24%) and GutaFlow Bioseal (2.10% ± 1.47 %) in comparison with those for MM Seal (8.47% ± 2.41%) and AH Plus (0.06% ± 0.12%), possibly due to the polymer reaction between bisphenol A and F resins, which promote a closer and more rigid structure through hydrogen bonds and allow the adsorption of water after polymerization. 1, 3,5,6,7,8,9,13,14,15,16,21,23 GuttaFlow 2 showed a significant loss of sample mass, likely because of the presence of gutta-percha and silver nanoparticles, which confer greater stability to the polymer matrix due to attractive forces and cross-linking between molecules.…”

Section: 4621mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the physicochemical properties of silicone- and epoxy resin-based root canal sealers

Camargo

Silva‐Sousa

et al. 2017

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the physicochemical properties of AH Plus, GuttaFlow 2, GuttaFlow BioSeal, and MM Seal, five samples of each root canal sealer were evaluated to determine their setting time (ST), dimensional change (DC), solubility (SL), flow (FL), and radiopacity (RD) according to American National Standards Institute/American Dental Association (ANSI/ADA) Specification 57. The distilled and deionized water obtained from the SL test were subjected to atomic absorption spectrometry to observe the presence of Ca , and RD (mmAl) (AH Plus 7.52 ± 1.59; GuttaFlow 2 6.85 ± 0.14; GuttaFlow Bioseal 7.02 ± 0.18; MM Seal 3.32 ± 0.90). ST, DC, SL, FL, and RD showed statistical differences among the root canal sealers (p < 0.05). As AH Plus showed the lowest DC and SL values (p < 0.05), the findings indicate that this sample is the only sealer conforming to ANSI/ADA standards.

show abstract

Properties of Tricalcium Silicate Sealers

Cited by 127 publications

References 20 publications

Efficacy and retrievability of root canal filling using calcium silicate‐based and epoxy resin‐based root canal sealers with matched obturation techniques

Efficacy and retrievability of root canal filling using calcium silicate‐based and epoxy resin‐based root canal sealers with matched obturation techniques

Chemistry and Bioactivity of NeoMTA Plus™ versus MTA Angelus® Root Repair Materials

Evaluation of the physicochemical properties of silicone- and epoxy resin-based root canal sealers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About