Acidic <scp>pH</scp> weakens the microhardness and microstructure of three tricalcium silicate materials

Wang, Zhong; Ma, Jia; Shen, Ya; Haapasalo, Markus

doi:10.1111/iej.12318

Cited by 42 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(61 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As for BCP, Sharma concluded that EDTA reduced microhardness (with the potential of losing its structural integrity with prolonged EDTA exposure), while NaOCl increased microhardness. These findings are in accordance with other studies . There are no evidence‐based recommendations regarding the ideal time to leave BCP to set before subjecting the material to irrigants during root canal therapy.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 88%

The effects of sodium hypochlorite and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on the microhardness of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and TotalFill Bioceramic Putty

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of 5% NaOCl and 17% EDTA on the Vickers microhardness of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, MTA Angelus (MTAA), and TotalFill Bioceramic Putty (BCP) after 24 h and 8 days. Twenty-four samples of MTAA and BCP were tested for baseline microhardness at 24 h. They were divided into four subgroups (5% NaOCl or 17% EDTA, 24 h, 5% NaOCl or 17% EDTA at 8 days) and microhardness was evaluated at different timepoints. Results were recorded and analysed statistically via one-way ANOVA Kruskal-Wallis test and post hoc uncorrected Dunn's multiple comparison test. MTAA had a higher baseline microhardness than BCP. NaOCl reduced the microhardness of MTAA but increased that of BCP. EDTA reduced the microhardness for both materials at 24 h. At 8 days, EDTA reduced the microhardness of MTAA, while BCP exhibited an increase in microhardness. Enabling these materials to set for a week prior to exposure to irrigants improves their microhardness.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 88%

The effects of sodium hypochlorite and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on the microhardness of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and TotalFill Bioceramic Putty

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The pH value of both ERRM and MTA treated canals declined to the levels of the negative control after a 4-week incubation in saline. A recent study showed that the microhardness values of ERRM Putty and ERRM Paste can be reduced in an acidic environment, and resulted in these materials having more porous and less crystalline microstructures (193). ERRM Putty Fig.…”

Section: Physico-chemical Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioceramic materials in endodontics

Wang¹

2015

Endodontic Topics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the past two decades, a number of major advances have been made in the field of bioactive ceramics used for endodontic treatment. This article reviews the physico‐chemical and biological properties of bioceramic materials and the application of bioceramic technology to endodontics. Bioceramic materials, with their biocompatible nature and excellent physico‐chemical properties, are widely used in endodontic applications. They can function as cements, root repair materials, root canal sealers and filling materials, which have the advantages of enhanced biocompatibility, potential increased root strength following obturation, antibacterial properties and sealing ability. New bioceramic materials have demonstrated the ability to overcome some of the significant limitations of earlier generations of endodontic materials. Most bioceramic materials have been shown to be biocompatible and have good physico‐chemical characteristics, therefore having a potential use in clinical endodontics. Although in vitro studies on the use of bioceramic materials in endodontics have given encouraging results, randomized and double‐blind clinical studies of sufficient length with these materials are needed to confirm long‐term success following their use.

show abstract

“…Surface microhardness has been used as an indicator of the overall strength of a material and its performance under masticatory stresses [12] . For hydraulic cements such as MTA, surface microhardness depicts the degree of hydration that occurred during the setting process and the influence of the setting environment on the overall strength of the material [13] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Push-Out Bond Strength and Surface Microhardness of Calcium Silicate-Based Biomaterials: An in vitro Study

Majeed

AlShwaimi²

2016

Med Princ Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

of 1 mm/min. Samples were analyzed under a light microscope to determine the nature of bond failure. Ten samples (2 mm thick) were prepared for all the materials, and Vickers microhardness was determined using a digital hardness tester. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey-Kramer multiple comparison tests at a significance level of p < 0.05. Results: Biodentine (42.02; 39.35 MPa) and ProRoot MTA (21.86; 34.13 MPa) showed significantly higher bond strengths than BioAggregate (6.63; 10.09 MPa) in coronal and apical root dentin, respectively ( p < 0.05). Biodentine also differed significantly from ProRoot MTA in coronal dentin. Bond failure was predominantly adhesive in Biodentine and ProRoot MTA, while BioAggregate showed predominantly mixed failure. ProRoot MTA (158.52 HV) showed significantly higher microhardness and BioAggregate (68.79 HV) showed the lowest hardness. Conclusion: Biodentine and ProRoot MTA showed higher bond strength and microhardness compared to BioAggregate. AbstractObjective: This was an in vitro evaluation of push-out bond strength and surface microhardness of calcium silicatebased biomaterials in coronal and apical root dentin. Materials and Methods: Ninety sections (2 mm thick) of coronal and apical root dentin were obtained from roots of 60 extracted teeth; the canals were enlarged to a standardized cavity diameter of 1.3 mm. Sections were randomly divided into 6 groups ( n = 15 per group), and cavities were filled with Biodentine TM , BioAggregate, or ProRoot mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), according to the manufacturers' instructions. Push-out bond strength values were measured using a universal testing machine under a compressive load at a speed Significance of the StudyIn this study, the push-out bond strength and microhardness of 3 materials, ProRoot MTA, Biodentine, and BioAggregate, were compared. Biodentine and ProRoot MTA had higher bond strength and microhardness values than BioAggregate, and hence could be the materials of choice for root repair procedures and retrograde fillings.

show abstract

Acidic pH weakens the microhardness and microstructure of three tricalcium silicate materials

Cited by 42 publications

References 25 publications

The effects of sodium hypochlorite and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on the microhardness of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and TotalFill Bioceramic Putty

The effects of sodium hypochlorite and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid on the microhardness of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and TotalFill Bioceramic Putty

Bioceramic materials in endodontics

Push-Out Bond Strength and Surface Microhardness of Calcium Silicate-Based Biomaterials: An in vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About