| Literature DB >> 34083916 |
Ruchika Nirmal Jain1, Sathish Abraham1, Rohini Ramesh Karad1, Harshal Balasaheb Najan1, Sneha Dhruvkumar Vaswani1, Arun Torris2.
Abstract
CONTEXT: This study focuses on the marginal adaptation of a calcium silicate-based cement to the root dentin after retrieval of different intracanal medicaments. AIM: This study compared the marginal adaptation of a calcium silicate-based cement to radicular dentin in the apical third of the root canal following the use of three different intracanal medicaments.Entities:
Keywords: Biodentine; calcium hydroxide; intracanal medicaments; marginal adaptation; micro-computed tomography; propolis
Year: 2021 PMID: 34083916 PMCID: PMC8095688 DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_561_20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Conserv Dent ISSN: 0972-0707
Figure 1Representative micro-computed tomography photos of radicular dentin showing the external voids between the dentin walls and barrier material (Biodentine) marked with yellow arrows in axial view. (a) Control group; significant differences in the gap volumes were observed between the medicated and the control groups. (b) Metapex - Biodentine; decreased marginal adaptation than other test groups (c) calcium hydroxide - Propolis-Biodentine; less external voids when compared to Metapex and triple antibiotic paste group. (d) Triple antibiotic paste - Biodentine; more marginal adaptation compared to Metapex group
Mean and standard deviation values (percentage of volume) in mm3 of the external voids between the dentin walls and barrier material (Biodentine)
| Mean | SD | Standard error | Minimum | Maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group1 (control) | 0.65 | 0.17 | 0.05 | 0.40 | 0.90 |
| Group 2 (Metapex) | 5.25 | 0.29 | 0.09 | 4.90 | 5.60 |
| Group 3 (Propolis + CH) | 1.47 | 0.23 | 0.07 | 1.20 | 1.90 |
| Group 4 (TAP) | 4.37 | 0.30 | 0.09 | 3.90 | 4.80 |
The findings between the groups are highly significant with P<0.001. CH: Calcium hydroxide, TAP: Triple antibiotic paste. SD: Standard deviation
Figure 2(a-d) Highlight the voids between Biodentine and radicular dentin in Group (a) Control group Group (b) Metapex Biodentine, Group (c) calcium hydroxide – Propolis – Biodentine and Group (d) triple antibiotic paste Biodentine respectively
Pairwise Comparison of percentage of external voids present between dentin walls and barrier material in Group A (Control group), Group B (Metapex), Group C (Propolis and CaOH2) and Group D (TAP) visualised under MicroCT using Tukey’s Post Hoc test
| Tukey’s | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Comparison Group | Mean Difference | |
| Group 1 (CONTROL) | Group 2 (METAPEX) | 4.60 | |
| Group 3 (PROPOLIS + CH*) | 0.82 | ||
| Group 4 (TAP†) | 3.72 | ||
| Group 2 (METAPEX) | Group 3 (PROPOLIS + CH*) | 3.78 | |
| Group 4 (TAP†) | 0.88 | ||
| Group 3 (PROPOLIS + CH*) | Group 4 (TAP†) | 2.90 | |
P>0.05 – not significant, *P<0.05 – significant, **P<0.001 – highly significant. *Calcium Hydroxide, †Triple Antibiotic Paste
Graph 1Graphical representation comparing the percentage of external voids (in mm3) present between dentin walls and barrier material between Group 1 (Control group), Group 2 (Metapex), Group 3 (Propolis and calcium hydroxide), and Group 4 (triple antibiotic paste)