Dr. MH. Nekoofar

DDS, MSc, DoIBoE, PhD

Tag: CEM Cement

  • Fracture Resistance of Immature Incisors Following Root Filling with Various Bioactive Endodontic Cements Using an Experimental Bovine Tooth Model

    Abstract

    Objective The aim of this study was to compare the fracture resistance of immature bovine roots when using ProRoot MTA, CEM Cement, and Biodentine as root filling materials. Materials and Methods An immature bovine tooth model was developed by removing the coronal and apical portions of 70 bovine incisors 8 mm above and 12 mm below the cementoenamel junction (CEJ). The specimens were then divided into five groups: ProRoot MTA, CEM Cement, Biodentine, gutta-percha/AH26 sealer, and control. All groups received a 5-mm apical plug with a temporary restorative material. Then, the remaining root canal space was filled with one of the afore-mentioned materials. After setting, the specimens were mounted in acrylic resin. Then, 3 mm coronal to the CEJ from the buccal side of the teeth and at a 135°angle to the long axis, the specimens were loaded until fracture.

    Results The specimens in the Biodentine (2196 N) and ProRoot MTA (2103 N) groups had significantly greater fracture resistance in comparison to the control group (p = 0.01). No significant difference was found between CEM Cement, gutta-percha and sealer AH26, and control groups. No significant differences occurred between the four experimental groups (p = 0.45).

    Conclusion Filling the root canal space with ProRoot MTA and Biodentine contributed to higher fracture resistance values.

    Keywords: Fracture Resistance, Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, CEM Cement, Biodentine

     Fracture Resistance of Immature Incisors Following Root Filling with Various Bioactive Endodontic Cements Using an Experimental Bovine Tooth Model.pdf

  • Microstructure and Chemical Analysis of Four Calcium Silicate-Based Cements in Different Environmental Conditions

    Abstract

    Objective The objective of this study was to analyze the microstructure and crystalline structures of ProRoot MTA, Biodentine, CEM Cement, and Retro MTA when exposed to phosphate-buffered saline, butyric acid, and blood.

    Methods and materials Mixed samples of ProRoot MTA, Biodentine, CEM Cement, and Retro MTA were exposed to either phosphate-buffered saline, butyric acid, or blood. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopic (EDX) evaluations were conducted of specimens. X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis was also performed for both hydrated and powder forms of evaluated calcium silicate cements.

    Results The peak of tricalcium silicate and dicalcium silicate detected in all hydrated cements was smaller than that seen in their unhydrated powders. The peak of calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2) in blood- and acid-exposed ProRoot MTA, CEM Cement, and Retro MTA specimens were smaller than that of specimens exposed to PBS. The peak of Ca(OH)2 seen in Biodentine™ specimens exposed to blood was similar to that of PBS-exposed specimens. On the other hand, those exposed to acid exhibited smaller peaks of Ca(OH)2.

    Conclusion Exposure to blood or acidic pH decreased Ca(OH)2 crystalline formation in ProRoot MTA, CEM Cement and Retro MTA. However, a decrease in Ca(OH)2 was only seen when Biodentine™ exposed to acid.

    Clinical relevance The formation of Ca(OH)2 which influences the biological properties of calcium silicate cements was impaired by blood and acid exposures in ProRoot MTA, CEM Cement, and Retro MTA; however, in the case of Biodentine, only exposure to acid had this detrimental effect.

    Keywords: Biodentine, Calcium Silicate Cement, CEM Cement, EDX, MTA, SEM, XRD.

  • Acid and Microhardness of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and Mineral Trioxide Aggregate–like Materials

    The aim of this study was to compare the surface microhardness of BioAggregate, ProRoot MTA, and CEMCement when exposed to an acidic environment or phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) as a synthetic tissue fluid. Methods: Ninety cylindrical molds made of polymethyl methacrylate with an internal diameter of 6 mm and height of 4 mm (according to ASTM E384 standard for microhardness tests) were fabricated and filled with BioAggregate (n = 30), tooth-colored ProRoot MTA (n = 30), or CEM Cement (n = 30). Each group was then divided into 3 subgroups of 10 specimens consisting of those exposed to distilled water, exposed to PBS (pH = 7.4), or exposed to butyric acid (pH = 5.4). After 1 week the Vickers surface microhardness test was performed. Statistical analysis included 2-way analysis of variance, followed by post hoc Dunnett T3 in cases with lack of homoscedasticity and Tukey honestly significant difference in cases with homoscedasticity. 
    Results: The indentations obtained from the CEM Cement specimens exposed to an acidic pH were not readable because of incomplete setting. There was a significant difference between the microhardness of the materials regardless of the environmental conditions (P < .001). In all the environmental conditions, MTA had significantly higher and CEM Cement had significantly lower microhardness values (P < .001). All experimental cements had significantly higher microhardness values when exposed to PBS (P < .001) and had significantly lower microhardness values when exposed to butyric acid (P < .001). Conclusions: The surface microhardness of BioAggregate, ProRoot MTA, and CEM Cement was reduced significantly by exposure to butyric acid and increased significantly by exposure to PBS. In all environmental conditions, MTA had significantly higher microhardness values. (J Endod 2014;40:432–435)

     Acid and Microhardness of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate.pdf

  • Effect of Acid Etching Procedures on the Compressive Strength of 4 Calcium Silicate–based Endodontic Cements

    The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of acid etching on the compressive strength of 4 calcium silicate–based cements. Methods: One gram of each corresponding powder of ProRoot MTA (Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Johnson City, TN), MTA Angelus (Angelus, Londrina, PR, Brazil), and CEM cement (BioniqueDent, Tehran, Iran) and a 0.33-g aliquot of liquid were placed in a plastic mixing capsule that was then mechanically mixed for 30 seconds at 4500 rpm in an amalgamator. For the preparation of Biodentine (Septodont, Saint Maur-des-Fosses, France), the liquid provided was added to the powder within the plastic capsule supplied by the manufacturer and then mechanically mixed for 30 seconds at 4500 rpm using the amalgamator. The resulting slurries were then placed incrementally into 40 cylindrical molds to give a total of 160 specimens that were incubated at 37C for a week. Twenty specimens of each material were then subjected to the acid etch procedure. The compressive strength of the samples was then calculated in megapascals using a universal testing machine. The results were then subjected to 2-way analysis of variance analysis of variance followed by the Tukey post hoc test.
    Results: The application of acid etch significantly reduced (P < .0001) the compressive strength of Angelus MTA and CEM cement; however, it did not reduce the compressive strength of ProRoot MTA or Biodentine. Regardless of the acid etch application, Biodentine showed significantly higher compressive strength values than the other materials (P < .0001), whereas CEM cement had the lowest compressive strength values. There was no significant differenc between CEM cement and MTA Angelus. The compressive strength of ProRoot MTA was significantly lower (P < .0001) than Biodentine but significantly higher (P <.0001) than MTA Angelus and CEM cement in both  the test and control groups. Conclusions: When the application of acid etchants is required, Biodentine and ProRoot MTA seem to be better options than MTA Angelus or CEM cement. (J Endod 2013;39:1646–1648)

     Effect of Acid Etching Procedures on the Compressive.pdf