Porosity analysis of MTA and Biodentine cements for use in endodontics by using micro–computed tomography

Abstract

BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to compare the porosity of two repair cements, White ProRoot® MTA and Biodentine®. These samples were analyzed by using micro-computed microtomography.Material and MethodsSixteen samples were used in the study that were divided according to the composition of the materials used. White ProRoot® MTA (n = 8) and Biodentine® (n = 8) were the samples prepared according to the manufacturer’s instructions. They were placed in silicone molds of 5 ± 0.1mm in height and an internal diameter of 5 ± 0.1mm, 24 hours after its preparation, the samples were scanned through a micro-CT, the porosity results were analyzed statistically by independent “t” tests.ResultsIt is evident that Biodentine® has better porosity properties than ProRoot® MTA. The results of the study quantify a smaller number of pores per surface, a smaller volume in each pore per mm3 and a lower total porosity present in samples of Biodentine® unlike ProRoot® MTA samples which is larger in both.ConclusionsThe results obtained in computerized microtomography endodontic biomaterial samples concluded that Biodentine® has a lower porosity than ProRoot® MTA. Key words:Porosity, microleakage, micro-CT, endodontic cements.

Micro‐CT analysis of the marginal adaptation and porosity associated with ultrasonic activation of coronally placed tricalcium silicate‐based cements

“…Basturk et al and Aminoshariae et al concluded that ultrasonication caused more voids than hand condensation and suggested that MTA might not be ideal for ultrasonic activation because of its powder-to-liquid ratios (23,27). In addition, Guerrero et al reported that Biodentine had less porosity than ProRoot WMTA (28). The aforementioned studies were carried out by placing the materials in standardised moulds.…”

Evaluación comparativa de las características de porosidad entre el cemento Portland, MTA y Biodentine con microscopio electrónico de barrido

“…En el presente estudio, los resultados son similares a los obtenidos por Guerrero et al (2018), pues ambos estudios dan como resultado un mayor número de poros en el MTA ( 1 ).…”

Apatite‐like forming ability, porosity, and bond strength of calcium aluminate cement with chitosan, zirconium oxide, and hydroxyapatite additives

“…The roots were divided into five groups: MTA, C, C + chitosan (Cchi), C + zirconium oxide (Czio), C + hydroxyapatite (Chap), as well as two subgroups: (A) without phosphate buffer solution (PBS) and (B) with PBS. The sample size ( n = 10 for each subgroup of each assessment, that is, apatite‐like forming ability, pH and Ca 2+ release, bond strength and porosity) was determined according to previous studies (Do Carmo et al, 2018; Guerrero & Berástegui, 2018; Marques et al, 2015; Oliveira, Andrade, Parreira, Jacobovitz, & Pandolfelli, 2015; Parreira et al, 2016; Sisli & Ozbas, 2017).…”

“…The porosity after final setting of the cement represents one of the major limitations of endodontic cements (Basturk, Nekoofar, Gunday, & Dummer, 2014; De‐Deus et al, 2015; Parirokh & Torabinejad, 2010). In fact, porosities may increase the risk of penetration of contaminated body fluids and blood, which makes the material unstable and results in contamination of the root canal system (Camilleri et al, 2014; Guerrero & Berástegui, 2018; Sisli & Ozbas, 2017). Therefore, the cement apatite‐like forming and sealing abilities are essential for the success of retrograde endodontic treatment (Camilleri et al, 2014; Parirokh & Torabinejad, 2010).…”