Abstract
The chemical-physical properties of novel and long-standing calcium silicate cements versus conventional pulp capping calcium hydroxide biomaterials were compared.
Calcium hydroxide–based (Calxyl, Dycal, Life, Lime-Lite) and calcium silicate–based (ProRoot MTA, MTA Angelus, MTA Plus, Biodentine, Tech Biosealer capping, TheraCal) biomaterials were examined. Calcium and hydroxyl ion release, water sorption, interconnected open pores, apparent porosity, solubility and apatite-forming ability in simulated body fluid were evaluated.
All calcium silicate materials released more calcium. Tech Biosealer capping, MTA Plus gel and Biodentine showed the highest values of calcium release, while Lime-Lite the lowest. All the materials showed alkalizing activity except for Life and Lime-Lite. Calcium silicate materials showed high porosity values: Tech Biosealer capping, MTA Plus gel and MTA Angelus showed the highest values of porosity, water sorption and solubility, while TheraCal the lowest. The solubility of water-containing materials was higher and correlated with the liquid-to-powder ratio. Calcium phosphate (CaP) deposits were noted on materials surfaces after short aging times. Scant deposits were detected on Lime-Lite. A CaP coating composed of spherulites was detected on all calcium silicate materials and Dycal after 28 days. The thickness, continuity and Ca/P ratio differed markedly among the materials. MTA Plus showed the thickest coating, ProRoot MTA showed large spherulitic deposits, while TheraCal presented very small dense spherulites.
calcium silicate-based cements are biointeractive (ion-releasing) bioactive (apatite-forming) functional biomaterials. The high rate of calcium release and the fast formation of apatite may well explain the role of calcium silicate biomaterials as scaffold to induce new dentin bridge formation and clinical healing.
J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2015; 13(1): e43 - e60
Article Type: ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
DOI:10.5301/jabfm.5000201
Authors
Maria Giovanna Gandolfi, Francesco Siboni, Tatiana Botero, Maurizio Bossù, Francesco Riccitiello, Carlo PratiArticle History
- • Accepted on 10/01/2014
- • Available online on 04/09/2014
- • Published online on 18/03/2015
Disclosures
This article is available as full text PDF.
Authors
- Gandolfi, Maria Giovanna [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 1, * Corresponding Author ([email protected])
- Siboni, Francesco [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 1
- Botero, Tatiana [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 2
- Bossù, Maurizio [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 3
- Riccitiello, Francesco [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 4
- Prati, Carlo [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 1, 5
Affiliations
-
Unit of Odontostomatological Sciences, Laboratory of Biomaterials and Oral Pathology, Department of Biomedical and NeuroMotor Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna - Italy -
Department of Cariology, Restorative Science and Endodontics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan - USA -
Unit of Paediatric Dentistry, Department of Odontostomatological and Maxillo-Facial Sciences, University of Rome Sapienza, Rome - Italy -
Department of Odontostomatological and Maxillofacial Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples - Italy -
Unit of Odontostomatological Sciences, Endodontic Clinical Section, Department of Biomedical and NeuroMotor Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna - Italy
Article usage statistics
The blue line displays unique views in the time frame indicated.
The yellow line displays unique downloads.
Views and downloads are counted only once per session.