Endodontide Kullanılan Farklı Biyomateryallerin Radyopasitelerinin Karşılaştırılması
Project no. 22456 · Status: Kapanmış (Yayın bekleniyor) · 2021
Summary
<p><strong>Comparison of Radiopacity of Various Biomaterials Used in Endodontics Purpose:</strong></p><p><strong> </strong>The aim of our study is to compare the radiopacity of endodontic</p><p>bioceramics produced by various companies on digital radiographic images.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Test materials were prepared in accordance with the recommendations of the manufacturers. To ensure diameter and height standardization among the samples, standard cylindrical molds of 5 mm diameter and 1 mm height were produced from white derlin plastic, and the materials were placed in the molds. The samples were incubated at 370C for 48 hours until the freezing reaction was completed. Radiographic images were obtained with the Carestream CS2100 x-ray machine (Carestream Dental, Atlanta, GA) using phosphor plates (Digora Optime, KaVo Dental, Germany). The object beam source distance was adjusted to be 30 cm and the phosphor plates were irradiated at 60 kVp, 7 mA for 0.32 seconds. The plates were then scanned with a Digora Optime scanner (Soredex, Helsinki, Finland) and the resulting images were saved as an 8-bitt TIFF file with Digora for Windows software. The mean gray values (MGV) of each step of each test specimen, dentin, and aluminum step-wedge were evaluated using the histogram feature of a computer program (Adobe Photoshop 23.3.1., Adobe System, San Jose, CA, USA). The mean optical density unit (ODU) and gray value (MGV) of each sample were converted to Al mm equivalents via penetrometer using Excel software (Microsoft Excel 2019 MSO, New Mexico, USA). Statistical analyzes were performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics 25.0 (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY. IBM Corp.) program.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average radiopacity of the Biodentine group was 4.10±0.28 mm Al (3.60-4.60 mm Al). The average density of the MM-MTA group was 7.12±0.66 mm Al (5.80-8.30 mm Al). The mean radiopacity value of the Tehnodent Rootdent group was 6.18±0.45 mm Al (5.30-6.80 mm Al). The mean radiopacity of the MTA BioRep group was 5.11±0.71 mm Al (4.10-6.20 mm Al). It was observed that the MTA Angelus group had an average of 7.71±0.49 mm Al (6.90-8.40 mm Al) radiopacity. The mean density of the ProRoot MTA group was 8.09±0.58 mm Al (6.90-8.90 mm Al). Radiopacity value of Bio MTA+ group was 8.02±0.37 mm Al (7.30-8.60 mm Al). Radiopacity of Endoart MTA group was determined as</p><p>VII</p><p>7.31±0.51 mm Al (6.30-8.00 mm Al). It was found that dentin had a mean radiopacity of 1.89±0.24 mm Al (1.40-2.20 mm Al).</p><p>The mean radiopacity value of the biodentine material was found to be statistically significantly lower than all other test materials (p<0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the mean radiopacity value of the MM-MTA material and MTA Angelus and Endoart MTA materials (p>0.05), it was found to be statistically different from other materials (p<0.05). The mean radiopacity value of the Tehnodent Rootdent material was statistically significantly different from all other materials (p<0.05). The mean radiopacity value of MTA BioRep material was found to be statistically significantly different from all other materials (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean radiopacity value of the MTA Angelus material and the MM-MTA, ProRoot MTA, Bio MTA+, and Endoart MTA materials (p>0.05); There was a statistically significant difference between Biodentine, Tehnodent Rootdent, MTA BioRep and dentin groups (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean radiopacity value of ProRoot MTA material and MTA Angelus, Bio MTA+ and Endoart MTA materials (p>0.05); A statistically significant difference was found between Biodentine, MM-MTA, Tehnodent Rootdent, MTA BioRep and dentin (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean radiopacity value of Bio MTA+ material and MTA Angelus and ProRoot MTA materials (p>0.05); Biodentine was statistically different from MM-MTA, Tehnodent Rootdent, MTA BioRep, Endoart MTA and dentin (p<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the mean radiopacity value of Endoart MTA material and MM- MTA, MTA Angelus and ProRoot MTA materials (p>0.05); There were statistically significant differences between Biodentine, Tehnodent Rootdent, MTA BioRep, Bio MTA+ and dentin groups (p<0.05). Radiopacity values of all materials were statistically significantly higher than dentin tissue (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While all the materials included in the study had a radiopacity in accordance with the ISO standard, they showed significant radiopacity values within themselves. Among the materials, ProRoot MTA had the highest radiopacity value with 8.09±0.58 mm Al, while Biodentine showed the lowest radiopacity value with 4.10±0.28 mm Al. All materials showed higher radiopacity than dentin tissue.</p><p>VIII </p>