Revathi, Chethan, Revathi, Soubhagya, and Kumari: Novel material for root-end applications for bio-allied sciences


Introduction

Over the years, a lot of materials have been discovered, which finds its applications as root-end materials. Though some of them have been used extensively, and have substantial research data, they still are found to be deficient in few aspects, thus providing scope for development of newer materials. With the advent of several materials it is not only the duty of the industry to develop such materials but it is also the duty of the treating physician/clinician to have knowledge of the same. Without the knowledge, no use can be advocated which would mean reduced data to draw some important conclusions on their use. Hence, this review article focuses on the use of such materials with its biochemical properties, advantages, disadvantages as well as its applications.

Mineral Tri-oxide aggregate (MTA)

Since its introduction by Torabinejad in the year 1993, MTA has increasingly become widespread among the clinicians. MTA is essentially Portland cement (SiO2, CaO, Al2O3, MgO and Fe2O3), to which a radio-opacifier (Bi2O3) and anhydrous calcium sulphate have been added. It is biocompatible, osteogenic and capable of interacting with living tissues which allows the deposition of apatite crystals in the MTA-tissue interface. Over the years, MTA has been proven to induce hard tissue formation.1 Further, it also displays excellent sealing property and also can set in the presence of moisture; hence, the name ‘hydraulic silicate cement’.2 However, there are several disadvantages in case of use of MTA, like

  1. Removal of MTA from canals is difficult

  2. Extreme pH of the surrounding environment can decrease the surface hardness of set MTA. MTA can expand uncontrollably.3

  3. Grey MTA can pose esthetic problems by causing tooth and soft tissue. Impurities could be found in both the variants of MTA. Manipulating MTA could be challenging if not difficult.4

  4. MTA exhibits greater initial solubility, especially if it lacks an accelerator5

  5. Since MTA was not devoid of potential drawbacks, ongoing research for ideal material has produced novel products that may be more efficacious.

Bio-aggregate

A water based cement that primarily contains tri-calcium silicate, with radiopacity due to Tantalum oxide; also hydroxyapatite and amorphous silicon oxide have been added to reduce formation of the weak phase- calcium hydroxide.6 Purity of the compound is ensured via the elimination of aluminum. The material is bioactive.7 Sayeed et al suggested that bio-aggregate could be considered as a suitable alternative to MTA owing to the former’s ability in achieving a hermetic seal. Its sealing capacity could be attributed to:

  1. Nano-sized particles

  2. Excellent adhesion to the dentinal walls of the root canal, and

  3. Hydrophilic nature

The formation of a gel-like calcium silicate hydrate matrix in the set cement, increases strength, hardness, as well as it provides enhanced sealing properties.8 Bio-aggregate also exhibits excellent biocompatibility and also has the ability to aid periodontal regeneration.9

Bio-dentine

Bio-dentine is composed predominantly of tricalcium silicate and dicalcium silicate cement, which is available as a powder and liquid formulation. Calcium carbonate, calcium oxide, and zirconium oxide have been added as the accelerator.10 Bio-dentine can also be used as a root repair material but it is not indicated for procedures like root amputation and hemi-section. It has a working time of over 1 minute with the setting time in the range between 9 and 12 minutes.10 Human gingival fibroblasts could readily attach to the surface of set bio-dentine as well as MTA. The former has been found to be as biocompatible as MTA. The liquid portion of the material comprises of calcium extracts.11

Endo-sequence root repair material (ERRM)

EndoSequence Root Repair Material is a bio-ceramic material that contains nanoparticles of tricalcium silicate, dicalcium silicate, calcium phosphate monobasic, amorphous silicon dioxide, and tantalum pentoxide.12 It has been refined to eliminate aluminum and contains calcium phosphate monobasic and tantalum pentoxide (radiopacifier).13 It is marketed as a pre-mixed formulation in two different consistencies:

  1. Syringeable paste

  2. Condensable putty

The former has bendable tips to facilitate intra-canal material placement.14 According to the manufacturer, the material is easy to handle and dispense. It has a short setting time (~2 hours) and hence, high resistance to washout. The other favorable qualities are radiopacity, hydrophilicity, and high alkalinity (pH 12). Its high alkaline nature contributes to its bactericidal property. The setting reaction is initiated by dentinal moisture.15 Endo sequence is bioactive.16 After studying the sealing ability of ERRM when compared to MTA, Hirschberg et al concluded that MTA-restored samples were superior and exhibited lesser leakage.17 In a study that simulated root resorption defects, a higher pH was observed in specimens where white MTA was placed when compared to EndoSequence Root Repair Material. This was attributed to the greater and sustained release of hydroxyl ions from the MTA specimens. Nevertheless, some MTA samples exhibited discoloration, whereas the EndoSequence Root Repair Material samples did not.18

iRoot BP Plus

These are bio-ceramic materials that contain calcium silicate as the primary ingredient and set in the presence of moisture. The other ingredients are zirconium oxide, tantalum pentoxide, calcium phosphate as well as fillers. They are available in both putty as well as injectable forms, which are intended to be used for root canal filling and as a repair, sealing, and restorative material.19 These materials are claimed to be insoluble and radiopaque. Manufacturers state that it is free from the common contaminant-aluminum, and possess excellent physical properties, and is dimensionally stable after setting.20 A study found iRoot BP Plus to be biocompatible; nevertheless was found to be inferior to MTA when tested for a longer time period.21 Under simulated clinical conditions, iRoot FS exhibited a setting time of less than an hour, whereas iRoot BP Plus took significantly greater time to set (seven days).22

Ceramicrete

Ceramicrete belongs to the group of chemically bonded phosphate ceramic materials or CBPC, which are commonly used as cements and as shields for radioactive isotopes. Owing to its superior strength, and bio compatibility, this material was deemed to be useful as a dental material too. Radiopacity is due to the incorporation of radiopacifiers like bismuth oxide and cerium oxide. Ceramicrete exhibits good strength, lower porosity that can be attributed to the formation of potassium-magnesium phosphate hexahydrate ceramic matrix. It also has superior sealing capability.23 Though the initial pH was found to be acidic at 2.2, it later increased to 11 after 72 hours. The authors opined that the initial acidic pH could compromise an already inflamed tissue.24 The low pH was cited as the cause for initial osteoblasts death and lack of further cell growth. Low pH is shown to inhibit osteoblast activity.25 According to one study that observed the setting characteristics of Ceremicrete-D, the material exhibited a chalky consistency even after seven days of setting, which could potentially impact its strength.26

Capasio

Capasio is calcium-phospho-alumino-silicate based cement, mixed with a water based gel and contains bismuth oxide as the radiopacifier.27 When mixed, Capasio develops dough like consistency enabling better handling. According to a study, Capasio exhibited favorable properties such as decreased setting time (9 minutes), improved compressive strength, and washout resistance.26 It’s pH was found to be 10.9.28 Though its radiopacity was significantly lesser when compared to MTA, it performed marginally better than Ceremicrete-D.26 Capasio was found to be bioactive. Its mean particle size was significantly lesser (5.3µm) when compared to MTA (10µm). Smaller particles of Capasio can penetrate dentinal tubules better than MTA (up to a depth of 18-26 µm).29 This results in better material adaptation along the margins and retention.30

Quick-set

It is an improved version of Capasio. The change includes improved biocompatibility affected by excluding a cationic surfactant from the liquid gel. In a study conducted by Wei et al. murine dental papilla-derived odontoblast-like cells were used to compare cytotoxicity of Quick-Set. It was observed that biocompatibility of Quick-Set was similar to that of WMTA.31 Ashraf et al. observed that Quick-Set favorably induced osteogenic/ dentinogenic differentiation.32

Generex A and B

They are calcium-silicate-based materials with novel setting reactions. Generex A is comprised of tri-calcium silicate, di-calcium silicate, and tri-calcium aluminate. Its powder is finer when compared to that of MTA and uses unique gels for mixing.25 This enhances the handling characteristics and decreased the setting time.26 A study that evaluated Generex A, Capasio, Ceramicrete, and MTA for their osteogenic potential, observed that only MTA and Generex A induced osteoblast growth.25 Generex A set the fastest (1.25 hrs) when compared to Capasio and Ceramicrete (2.5 hours). Generex A also emerged as the strongest among the other materials tested.26

Endobinder

Endobinder differs from MTA in that, MgO and CaO, which cause undesirable expansion of the material, and Fe2O3, responsible for tooth darkening, are eliminated from its composition. Al2O3 and CaCO3 are calcined at temperatures between 1315oC and 1425oC and are ground. Bismuth oxide is added to obtain radiopacity. Purity is ensured by eliminating traces of MgO, CaO, and Fe2O332, 33 Endobinder produced higher osteoblastic differential than MTA, which was attributed to the lower calcium hydroxide release from Endobinder.34 it would be interesting to note that release of slightly higher concentration calcium stimulates overall functions of osteoblasts; whereas, an overload can cause cytotoxicity.35

Conclusion

Bioaggregate and Biodentine are tricalciumsilicate-based materials, Endobinder, Endosequence, Generex A and B, and iRoot BP Plus are calcium silicate based materials, Ceramicrete is a phosphate cement; whereas, Capasio and Quickset contain calcium-alumino-silicate. While these novel materials may claim improved properties over MTA, sustained research is essential to establish the same. The future may witness further novel materials, whose composition and characteristics may be entirely different from the materials that are in current use.

Source of Funding

None.

Conflict of Interest

None.

References

1 

T Kokubo H Takadama How useful is SBF in predicting in vivo bone bioactivity?Biomaterials2006271529071510.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.01.017

2 

B W Darvell R C T Wu MTA”-A Hydraulic Silicate Cement: Review update and setting reactionDent Mater20112754072210.1016/j.dental.2011.02.001

3 

B Storm F C Eichmiller P A Tordik G G Goodell Setting expansion of gray and white mineral trioxide aggregate and Portland cementJ Endod200834180210.1016/j.joen.2007.10.006

4 

B S Ber J F Hatton G P Stewart Chemical modification of ProRoot MTA to improve handling characteristics and decrease setting timeJ Endod200733101231410.1016/j.joen.2007.06.012

5 

E A Bortoluzzi N J Broon C M Bramante R B Garcia I G De-Moraes N Bernardineli Sealing ability of MTA and radiopaque Portland cement with or without calcium chloride for root-end fillingJ Endod200632989790010.1016/j.joen.2006.04.006

6 

L Grech B Mallia J Camilleri Characterization of set Intermediate Restorative Material, Biodentine, Bioaggregate and a prototype calcium silicate cement for use as root-end filling materialsInt Endod J20134676324110.1111/iej.12039

7 

N Shokouhinejad M H Nekoofa H Razmi S Sajadi T E Davies M A Saghiri Dummer Bioactivity of EndoSequence Root Repair Material and BioaggregateInt Endod J2012451211273410.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02083.x

8 

M El Sayed M H Saeed In vitro comparative study of sealing ability of Diadent BioAggregate and other root-end filling materialsJ Conserv Dent20121532495210.4103/0972-0707.97950

9 

Z Yuan B Peng H Jiang Z Bian P Yan Effect of bioaggregate on mineral-associated gene expression in osteoblast cellsJ Endod20103671145810.1016/j.joen.2010.03.025

10 

P Laurent J Camps De Meo Induction of specific cell responses to a Ca (3)SiO(5)-based posterior restorative materialDent Mater2008241114869410.1016/j.dental.2008.02.020

11 

H M Zhou Y Shen Z J Wang Y F Zheng L Hakkinen M Haapasalo In VitroCytotoxicity Evaluation of a Novel RootRepair MaterialJ Endod20133944788310.1016/j.joen.2012.11.026

12 

H Zhang F G Pappen M Haapasalo Dentin enhances the antibacterial effect of mineral trioxide aggregate and bioaggregateJ Endod2009352221410.1016/j.joen.2008.11.001

13 

G De-Deus A Canabarro G Alves A Linhares M I Senne J M Granjeiro Optimal cytocompatibility of bioceramic nanoparticulate cement in primary human mesenchymal cellsJ Endod2009351013879010.1016/j.joen.2009.06.022

14 

Z Amer J Alanezi K E Jiang Q Spangberg . W Larzs Cytotoxicity evaluation of endosequence root repair material. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod20101093122510.1016/j.tripleo.2009.11.028

15 

Et engasjert team med interesse for dentalfaget2016https://www.technomedics.no/direktorskifte-hos-examvision/

16 

N Shokouhinejad M H Nekoofar H Razmi S Sajadi T E Davies M A Saghiri Bioactivity of EndoSequence root repair material and bioaggregateInt Endod J2012451211273410.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02083.x

17 

C S Hirschberg N S Patel L M Patel D E Kadouri G R Hartwell Comparison of sealing ability of MTA and EndoSequenceBioceramic Root Repair Material: a bacterial leakage studyQuintessence Int201344515762

18 

S W Hansen G J Marshall C M Sedgley Comparison of Intracanal EndoSequence Root Repair Material and ProRoot MTA to Induce pH Changes in Simulated Root Resorption Defects over 4 Weeks in Matched Pairs of Human TeethJ Endod2011374502610.1016/j.joen.2011.01.010

19 

Y Jiang Q Zheng X Zhou Y Gao D Huang A Comparative Study on Root Canal Repair Materials: A Cytocompatibility Assessment in L929 and MG63 CellsSci World J2014201446382610.1155/2014/463826

20 

Innovative BioCeramix, Inc2010http://www.ibioceramix.com/Publications.html

21 

G De-Deus A Canabarro G G Alves J R Marins A B R Linhares J M Granjeiro Cytocompatibility of the ready-to-use bioceramic putty repair cement iRoot BP Plus with primary human osteoblastsInt Endod J20124565082110.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.02003.x

22 

G De-Deus A Canabarro G G Alves J R Marins A Linhares J M Granjeiro Cytocompatibility of the ready-to-use bioceramic putty repair cement iRoot BP Plus with primary human osteoblastsInt Endod J20124565081310.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.02003.x

23 

A S Wagh C Primus Method and product for phosphosilicate slurry for use in dentistry and related bone cements: US, 7083672B22005http://www.anl.gov/techtransfer/patents/7083672

25 

J T Washington E D Schneiderman R Spears C R Fernandez L A Opperman J He Biocompatibility and Osteogenic Potential of New Generation Endodontic Materials Established by Using Primary OsteoblastsJ Endod201137811667010.1016/j.joen.2011.05.011

26 

M L Porter A Bertó C M Primus I Watanabe Physical and chemical properties of new-generation endodontic materialsJ Endod2010363524810.1016/j.joen.2009.11.012

27 

A A Eid L A Niu M C Primus L A Opperman D H Pashley I Watanabe In Vitro Osteogenic/Dentinogenic Potential of Experimental Calcium Aluminosilicate CementJ Endod20133991161610.1016/j.joen.2013.04.005

28 

D C Bird T Komabayashi L Guo In vitroevaluation of dentinal tubule penetration and biomineralization ability of a new root-end filling materialJ Endod20123881093610.1016/j.joen.2012.04.017

29 

D C Bird T Komabayashi L Guo L A Opperman R Spears In Vitro Evaluation of Dentinal Tubule Penetration and Biomineralization Ability of a New Root-end Filling MaterialJ Endod20123881093610.1016/j.joen.2012.04.017

30 

I Heling N P Chandler The antimicrobial effect within dentinal tubules of four root canal sealersJ Endod1996225257910.1016/s0099-2399(06)80144-5

31 

W Wei Y P Qi S Y Nikonov Effects of an experimental calcium alumino-silicate cement on the viability of murine odontoblast-like cellsJ Endod20123879364210.1016/j.joen.2012.03.020

32 

V C Pandolfelli I R Oliveira H L Rossetto M Jacobovitz Root canal filling with cements based on mineral aggregates: an in vitro analysis of bacterial microleakageA composition based on aluminate cement for application in endodontics and the obtained cement product. (inventors) NPI 0704502-6 (patent registration, Portuguese)2007108110.1016/j.tripleo.2009.03.013

33 

F G Aguilar R Garcia F Carvalho P P De-Souza Biocompatibility of New Calcium Aluminate Cement (EndoBinder)J Endod201238333677110.1016/j.joen.2014.08.015

34 

L C Raucci I R Oliveira L N Teixeira A L Rosa P T Oliveira M Jacobovitz Effects of a Novel Calcium Aluminate Cement on the Early Events of the Progression of Osteogenic Cell CulturesBraz Dent J20112229910410.1590/s0103-64402011000200002

35 

S Orrenius B Zhivotovsky P Nicotera Regulation of cell death: the calcium-apoptosis linkNat Rev Mol Cell Biol2003475526510.1038/nrm1150



jats-html.xsl

© This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.


  • Article highlights
  • Article tables
  • Article images

Article History

Received : 14-07-2021

Accepted : 23-08-2021

Available online : 25-09-2021


View Article

PDF File   Full Text Article


Downlaod

PDF File   XML File   ePub File


Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

Article DOI

https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijce.2021.031


Article Metrics






Article Access statistics

Viewed: 88

PDF Downloaded: 25



Wiki in hindi