Publications

Detailed Information

Periapical bone regeneration after endodontic microsurgery with three different root-end filling materials: Amalgam, SuperEBA, and mineral trioxide aggregate

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorBaek, Seung-Ho-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Woo Cheol-
dc.contributor.authorKim, Syngcuk-
dc.contributor.authorSetzer, Frank C.-
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-13T02:26:33Z-
dc.date.available2011-10-13T02:26:33Z-
dc.date.issued2010-08-
dc.identifier.citationJ Endod 2010;36(8):1323–1325en
dc.identifier.issn0099-2399-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/74085-
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: The purpose of this study was to determine
the bone regeneration potential to different rootend
filling materials by evaluating the distance between
the materials and newly regenerated bone after root-end
surgery. Material and Methods: Periapical lesions
were induced in premolars and molars of five female
beagle dogs. The teeth were treated endodontically after
the development of the lesions. After 1 week, the teeth
underwent root-end surgery using modern microsurgical
techniques. Three different root-end filing materials
were used: amalgam (Tytin; Kerr Mfg Co, Romulus,
MI), SuperEBA (Bosworth, Skokie, IL), and mineral
trioxide aggregates (MTA; Dentsply, York, PA). After 4
months, the dogs were sacrificed, and the jaws were
prepared for histological sectioning. The distances from
the root-end filling materials to the regenerated bone
were determined by the evaluation of microradiographic
images of the sections with imaging software (Sigma
Scan/Image; Jandel Scientific Software, San Rafael,
CA). The results were statistically analyzed with analysis
of variance using Sigma Stat software (Jandel Scientific
Software, San Rafael, CA). Results: The mean distances
from the newly regenerated bone were 0.397 0.278
mm in the MTA group, 0.756 0.581 mm in the Super-
EBA group, and 1.290 0.386 mm in the amalgam
group. There was a statistically significant difference
between the amalgam and MTA groups (p < 0.05). No
significant differences existed for amalgam versus
SuperEBA and SuperEBA versus MTA. Conclusion:
MTA showed the most favorable periapical tissue
response. The distance from MTA to the regenerated
bone was similar to the normal average periodontal ligament
thickness in dogs.
en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherElsevieren
dc.subjectamalgamen
dc.subjectapical bone regenerationen
dc.subjectmicroradiographen
dc.subjectmineral trioxide aggregateen
dc.subjectroot-end sealen
dc.subjectSuperEBAen
dc.titlePeriapical bone regeneration after endodontic microsurgery with three different root-end filling materials: Amalgam, SuperEBA, and mineral trioxide aggregateen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor백승호-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor이우철-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김신국-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share