Pulpa Kuafaj Materyallerinin Radyopasitesinin Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2024, Volume: 6 Issue: 3, 324 - 335, 30.12.2024

Latife Altınok Uygun , Emre Sözen

https://doi.org/10.51122/neudentj.2025.132

Abstract

ÖZET
Amaç: Birçok pulpa kuafaj materyali ticari olarak mevcuttur, ancak bu materyallerin radyopasite seviyeleri net olarak bilinmemektedir. Bu çalışmada, on farklı pulpa kuafaj materyalinin radyopasite değerleri dijital radyografi ile değerlendirilmiştir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmada on farklı pulpa kuafaj materyali 3 adet mika plak kalıp içine üretici firmanın talimatına göre hazırlanıp yerleştirildi. Ayrıca bu çalışmada kullanmak için 1mm kalınlığında büyük azı dişi kuron kesiti ile 11 basamaklı alüminyum penetrometre hazırlandı. Başlangıç sertleşmelerini tamamlayan materyaller nemli bir ortamda 37 °C’de bekletildi. Her gruptan alınan birer numune, alüminyum penetrometre ve 1mm kalınlığında büyük azı dişi kuron kesiti fosfor plak üzerine yerleştirilerek radyografisi çekildi. Dijital görüntüler bir yazılım kullanılarak bilgisayara aktarıldı. Numunelerin radyografik yoğunlukları bir bilgisayar programı kullanılarak belirlendi ve değerler bir denklem kullanılarak milimetre alüminyum’a (mmAl) dönüştürüldü. İstatistiksel analiz için One-way ANOVA ve post-hoc Tamhane testleri yapıldı.
Bulgular: Neoputty (5,19 mmAl) grubunda en yüksek radyoopasite değerleri gözlenirken, Dycal (1,23 mmAl) grubu en düşük radyoopasite değerini göstermiştir (p < 0.05). Dycal, Calcimol LC, Theracal LC, Therecal PT’nin radyoopasite değerleri mineden daha düşük iken dentinle istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık yoktu (p < 0.05).
Sonuç: MTA materyalleri diğer pulpa kuafaj materyallerine göre daha yüksek radyopasiteye sahipti. Neoputty (5.19 mmAl) en yüksek radyopasite değeri gösterirken, Dycal en düşük radyopasite değerini göstermiştir.

Keywords

Dijital radyografi, mineral trioksit agregat, radyoopasite, trikalsiyum silikat, pulpa kuafaj

Evaluation of the Radiopacity of Pulp Capping Materials

Abstract

Aim: Many pulp capping materials are commercially available, but the radiopacity levels of these materials are not clearly known. In this study, the radiopacity values of ten different pulp capping materials were evaluated by digital radiography.
Material and Methods: Ten different pulp capping materials were prepared and placed in 3 mica plate moulds according to the manufacturer's instructions. In addition, a 1 mm thick molar crown section and an 11-step aluminium penetrometer were prepared for use in this study. After initial setting, the materials were kept at 37 °C in a humid environment. One specimen from each group, aluminium penetrometer and 1mm thick molar crown section were placed on a phosphor plate and radiographed. Digital images were transferred to a computer using software. The radiographic densities of the specimens were determined using a computer program and the values were converted to millimetre aluminium (mmAl) using an equation. One-way ANOVA and post-hoc Tamhane tests were performed for statistical analysis.
Results: Neoputty (5.19 mmAl) group showed the highest radiopacity values, while Dycal (1.23 mmAl) group showed the lowest radiopacity value (p < 0.05). While the radiopacity values of Dycal, Calcimol LC, Theracal LC, Therecal PT were lower than enamel (p < 0.05); there was no statistically significant difference with dentin (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: MTA materials had higher radiopacity than other pulp capping materials. Neoputty (5.19 mmAl) showed the highest radiopacity value, while Dycal showed the lowest radiopacity value.

Keywords

Digital radiography, mineral trioxide aggregate, pulp capping, radioopacity, tricalcium silicate

References

• Akerboom HB, Kreulen CM, van Amerongen WE, et al. Radiopacity of posterior composite resins, composite resin luting cements, and glass ionomer lining cements. J Prosthet Dent. 1993;70:351-5.
• Imperiano MT, Khoury HJ, Pontual MLA, et al. Comparative radiopacity of four lowviscosity composites. Braz J Oral Sci. 2007;6:1278-82.
• Amirouche A, Mouzali M, Watts D. Radiopacity evaluation of Bis‐GMA/TEGDMA/opaque mineral filler dental composites. J Appl Polym Sci. 2007;104:1632-39.
• Hilton TJ, Ferracane JL, Mancl L. Comparison of CaOH with MTA for direct pulp capping: a PBRN randomized clinical trial. J Dent Res. 2013;92:16S-22S.
• Sanz JL, Soler-Doria A, López-García S, et al. Comparative Biological Properties and Mineralization Potential of 3 Endodontic Materials for Vital Pulp Therapy: Theracal PT, Theracal LC, and Biodentine on Human Dental Pulp Stem Cells. J Endod. 2021;47:1896-906.
• Tagger M, Katz A. A standard for radiopacity of root-end (retrograde) filling materials is urgently needed. Int Endod J. 2004;37:260-4.
• Tanalp J, Karapınar-Kazandağ M, Dölekoğlu S, et al. Comparison of the radiopacities of different root-end filling and repair materials. Sci World J. 2013;2013:594950.
• Hara AT, Serra MC, Rodrigues Júnior AL. Radiopacity of glass-ionomer/composite resin hybrid materials. Braz Dent J. 2001;12:85-9.
• American National Standards Institute/American Dental Association (ANSI/ ADA). Specification number; 57. York: Endodontic sealing materials; 2021.
• International Organization for Standardization. ISO 13116. Test Method for determining radio-opacity of materials. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2014.
• International International Organization for Standardization. International Standard ISO 6876:2012: Dental root canal sealing materials. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2012.
• Baksi BG, Sen BH, Eyuboglu TF. Differences in aluminum equivalent values of endodontic sealers: conventional versus digital radiography. J Endod. 2008;34:1101-4.
• Beyer-Olsen EM, Orstavik D. Radiopacity of root canal sealers. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Radiol. 1981;51:320-8.
• Húngaro Duarte MA, de Oliveira El Kadre GD, Vivan RR, et al. Radiopacity of portland cement associated with different radiopacifying agents. J Endod. 2009;35:737-40.
• Lachowski KM, Botta SB, Lascala CA, et al. Study of the radio-opacity of base and liner dental materials using a digital radiography system. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013;42:20120153.
• Brennan J. An introduction to digital radiography in dentistry. J Orthod. 2002;29:66-9.
• Haak R, Wicht MJ, Hellmich M, et al. Detection of marginal defects of composite restorations with conventional and digital radiographs. Eur J Oral Sci. 2002;110:2826.
• Shah PM, Sidhu SK, Chong BS, et al. Radiopacity of resin-modified glass ionomer liners and bases. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;77:239-42.
• Akcay I, Ilhan B, Dundar N. Comparison of conventional and digital radiography systems with regard to radiopacity of root canal filling materials. Int Endod J. 2012;45:730-6.
• Tanomaru-Filho M, Torres FFE, Chávez-Andrade GM, et al. Physicochemical properties and volumetric change of silicone/bioactive glass and calcium silicate-based endodontic sealers. J Endod. 2017;43:2097-101.
• Rasimick BJ, Shah RP, Musikant BL, et al. Radiopacity of endodontic materials on film and a digital sensor. J Endod. 2007;33:1098-101.
• Camps J, Pommel L, Bukiet F. Evaluation of periapical lesion healing by correction of gray values. J Endod. 2004;30:762-6
• Versteeg CH, Sanderink GC, van der Stelt PF. Efficacy of digital intra-oral radiography in clinical dentistry. J Dent. 1997;25:215-24.
• Ergun S, Guneri P, Ilguy D, et al. How many times can we use a phosphor plate? A preliminary study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009;38:42-7.
• Gu S, Rasimick BJ, Deutsch AS, et al. Radiopacity of dental materials using a digital X-ray system. Dent Mater. 2006;22:765-70.
• An SY, An CH, Choi KS, et al. Radiopacity of contemporary luting cements using conventional and digital radiography. Imaging Sci Dent. 2018;48:97-101.
• American National Standards Institute/American Dental Association Specification No. 61 for zinc polycarboxylate cement. Council on dental materials, instruments and equipment. J Am Dent Assoc. 1980;101:669-71.
• Kapila R, Matsuda Y, Araki K, et al. Radiopacity measurement of restorative resins using film and three digital Systems for comparison with ISO 4049: International standard. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 2015;56:207-14.
• Yasa B, Kucukyilmaz E, Yasa E, et al. Comparative study of radiopacity of resin-based and glass ionomer-based bulk-fill restoratives using digital radiography. J Oral Sci. 2015;57:79-85.
• Watts DC, McCabe JF. Aluminium radiopacity standards for dentistry: an international survey. J Dent. 1999;27:73-8.
• Carvalho‐Junior J, Correr‐Sobrinho L, Correr A, et al. Radiopacity of root filling materials using digital radiography. Int Endod J. 2007;40:514-20.
• Williams JA, Billington RW. A new technique for measuring the radiopacity of natural tooth substance and restorative materials. J Oral Rehabil. 1987;14:267-9.
• Fonseca RB BC, Soares PV, et al. Radiodensity of base, liner and luting dental materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2006;10:114-8.
• Islam I, Chng HK, Yap AU. Comparison of the physical and mechanical properties of MTA and portland cement. J Endod. 2006;32:193-7.
• American National Standards Institute, American Dental Association. ANSI/ADA 57-2000. Endodontic sealing materials. American National Standards Institute; 2000.
• Tanomaru-Filho M, da Silva GF, Duarte MA, Gonçalves M, Tanomaru JM. Radiopacity evaluation of root-end filling materials by digitization of images. J Appl Oral Sci. 2008;16:376-9.
• Mutlu ŞN, Akbulut MB. Evaluation of Radiopacity of BIOfactor MTA by Digital Radiography. Selcuk Dent J. 2022;9:520-6.
• Camilleri J. Hydration mechanisms of mineral trioxide aggregate. Int Endod J 2007;40:462-70.
• Min KS, Chang HS, Bae JM, et al. The induction of heme oxygenase-1 modulates bismuth oxide-induced cytotoxicity in human dental pulp cells. J. Endod. 2007;33:1342-6.
• Coomaraswamy KS, Lumley PJ, Hofmann MP. Effect of bismuth oxide radioopacifier content on the material properties of an endodontic portland cement-based (MTA-like) system. J. Endod. 2007;33:295-8.
• Cavenago BC, Pereira TC, Duarte MA, et al. Influence of powder-to-water ratio on radiopacity, setting time, pH, calcium ion release and a micro-CT volumetric solubility of white mineral trioxide aggregate. Int Endod J. 2014;47:120-6.
• Costa BC, Guerreiro-Tanomaru JM, Bosso-Martelo R, et al. Ytterbium oxide as radiopacifier of calcium silicate-based cements. Physicochemical and biological properties. Braz Dent J. 2018;29:452-8.
• Candan M, Altinay Karaca FK, Öznurhan F. Evaluation of the shear bond strength of immediate and delayed restorations of various calcium silicate-based materials with fiber-reinforced composite resin materials. J Polym. 2023;15:3971.
• https://nusmile.com/products/nusmile-neoputty-2-4-gram-professional-kit
• Candeiro GT, Correia FC, Duarte MA, et al. Evaluation of radiopacity, pH, release of calcium ions, and flow of a bioceramic root canal sealer. J Endod. 2012;38:842-5.
• Gandolfi MG, Siboni F, Prati C. Chemical-physical properties of TheraCal, a novel light-curable MTA-like material for pulp capping. Int Endod J. 2012;45:571-9.
• Abo El-Mal EO, Abu-Seida AM, El Ashry SH. A comparative study of the physicochemical properties of hesperidin, MTA-Angelus and calcium hydroxide as pulp capping materials. Saudi Dent J. 2019;31:219-27.
• Kargozar S, Bagherpour A, Jafarzadeh H. Comparative evaluation of radiopacity of CEM, three types of MTA, gutta-percha and dentin using digital radiography. J Mash Dent Sch. 2020;44:384-96.
• Niemiec B. Oral radiology and imaging. In: Editor Heidi B., Editor Lobprice DVM. Wiggs's Veterinary Dentistry: Principles and Practice. 2nd edition. Wiley-Blackwell; 2019.41-61.
• Buchanan A, Benton B, Carraway A, et al. Perception versus reality—findings from a phosphor plate quality assurance study. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Radiol. 2017;123:496-501.