SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.71 issue3The whitening effect of four different commercial denture cleansers on stained acrylic resin author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


South African Dental Journal

On-line version ISSN 0375-1562
Print version ISSN 0011-8516

Abstract

SEEDAT, HC  and  VAN DER VYVER, PJ. An in-vitro comparison of microleakage between three calcium silicate cements and amalgam. S. Afr. dent. j. [online]. 2016, vol.71, n.3, pp.100-105. ISSN 0375-1562.

AIM: The purpose of this in-vitro study was to compare the sealing ability of White ProRoot® MTA, MTA Plus™, BiodentineTM and Permite Amalgam when used as root-end filling materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 120 single rooted, extracted teeth were endodontically treated. The apical 3 mm of each root was resected, and 3 mm deep root-end cavities were prepared. Specimens were divided into four groups (n=30) and filled with the following materials: ProRoot® MTA, MTA Plus™, Biodentine™, and Permite Amalgam. Specimens were submerged in Indian Ink for 48 hours, and sectioned horizontally in one millimetre increments from the apical end. Dye penetration was measured using a stereomicroscope. RESULTS: Data for different groups was summarised as percentages. Pairwise comparisons between the calcium silicate materials to amalgam were done at the 0.017 level of significance, using Fisher's exact test. Amalgam showed significantly more leakage than the calcium silicate materials (ProRoot® MTA, MTA PlusTM and Biodenti-neTM) (p<0.001). No significant differences in sealing ability were found among the calcium silicate materials. CONCLUSION: Amalgam should be regarded as unsuitable for use as a root-end filling material. Calcium silicate cements should be recommended as the material of choice for root-end filling.

        · text in English     · English ( pdf )