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
Comparative Study
. 2009 Aug;35(2):78-84.
doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2008.00131.x.

Scanning electron microscopy evaluation of the hard tissue barrier after pulp capping with calcium hydroxide, mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) or ProRoot MTA

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Scanning electron microscopy evaluation of the hard tissue barrier after pulp capping with calcium hydroxide, mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) or ProRoot MTA

Eduardo Galia Reston et al. Aust Endod J. 2009 Aug.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the morphology and localisation of calcium hydroxide- and mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)-induced hard tissue barriers after pulpotomy in dogs' teeth. Pulpotomies were performed on maxillary and mandibular premolars of five dogs. The teeth were assigned into three groups according to the pulp-capping agent used. The pulpal wounds were capped with calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)(2)- control), MTA or ProRoot MTA, and the cavities were restored with amalgam. After a 90-day follow-up period, the dogs were euthanised and the teeth were examined under scanning electron microscopy (SEM). An image-processing and analysis software was used to delimit the perimeters of the root canal area and the hard tissue barrier to determine the percentage of root canal obliteration. SEM data were used to assess the morphology, localisation and extension of the reparative hard tissue barriers. ProRoot MTA was statistically different from MTA and Ca(OH)(2) (P < 0.05) regarding tissue barrier morphology. Localisation data showed that ProRoot MTA was significantly different from Ca(OH)(2) (P < 0.05) and similar to MTA (P > 0.01; P > 0.05). No statistically significant difference (P > 0.01; P > 0.05) was observed between MTA and Ca(OH)(2). A larger number of complete (centroperipheral) hard tissue barriers with predominance of dentinal tubules was observed to the ProRoot MTA when compared with the Ca(OH)(2) group.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms