Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2005 Oct;100(4):495-500.
doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.03.027.

A comparative prospective randomized clinical study of MTA and IRM as root-end filling materials in single-rooted teeth in endodontic surgery

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

A comparative prospective randomized clinical study of MTA and IRM as root-end filling materials in single-rooted teeth in endodontic surgery

Jerome A H Lindeboom et al. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: Randomized clinical prospective study to evaluate the application of MTA and IRM as retrograde sealers in surgical endodontics.

Study design: One hundred single-rooted teeth were surgically treated. After randomization, MTA or IRM was used as a retrosealer. Radiographs were taken 1 week, 3 months, and 1 year postoperatively. Assessment was performed by 2 independent assessors 1 year after surgery. Both treatment groups were homogeneous in their composition, and clinical features and radiographic findings were classified according to Rud's classification.

Results: Complete healing was observed in 64% of the MTA-treated teeth vs 50% of the IRM-treated teeth. Incomplete healing was seen in 28% (MTA) vs 36% (IRM), and unsatisfactory in 6% (MTA) vs 14% (IRM). Only 1 failure was seen (MTA). No statistically significant differences were found between the 2 retrofilling materials.

Conclusion: As root-end filling materials in this clinical prospective randomized design on single rooted teeth, MTA and IRM had the same clinical effectiveness.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources