Comparison of the radiopacity of pulp capping materials.

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 BIOPHYSICS
Savas Sagmak, Esin Akol Gorgun, Emre Ozel
{"title":"Comparison of the radiopacity of pulp capping materials.","authors":"Savas Sagmak, Esin Akol Gorgun, Emre Ozel","doi":"10.1177/22808000261453058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/purpose: </strong>This study aimed to compare the radiopacity of pulp capping materials with that of dental hard tissues. In this study, the radiopacity of traditional and contemporary pulp capping materials was examined and compared with that of dental hard tissues and an aluminum step wedge.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Eight pulp capping materials were used in the study. Ten disk-shaped specimens, each 1 mm thick and 5 mm in diameter, were prepared from each material. Ten specimens from each material were placed on a photostimulable phosphor (PSP) plate system together with a tooth slice and the aluminum stepwedge. The images were analyzed with a software program (Adobe Photoshop) to measure mean gray values (MGVs). A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine whether there were significant differences among the groups. Tukey's test was applied for pairwise comparisons (<i>p</i> < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All materials used in the study showed greater radiopacity than dentin. BiOfactor, Dycal, MTA Angelus, ProRoot MTA were more radiopaque than enamel, while the other materials showed lower radiopacity than enamel. The radiopacity values of the materials were found as follows: Dentin < MTA CEM LC < Calcimol LC < Biodentin < TheraCal LC < Enamel < Dycal < BiOfactor < MTA Angelus < ProRoot MTA.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The materials examined were found to be more radiopaque than dentin. This may allow a more objective evaluation in radiographic examinations. However, in radiographic images in which enamel is superimposed, materials that do not exhibit greater radiopacity than enamel may complicate radiographic assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials","volume":"24 ","pages":"22808000261453058"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22808000261453058","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/purpose: This study aimed to compare the radiopacity of pulp capping materials with that of dental hard tissues. In this study, the radiopacity of traditional and contemporary pulp capping materials was examined and compared with that of dental hard tissues and an aluminum step wedge.

Materials and methods: Eight pulp capping materials were used in the study. Ten disk-shaped specimens, each 1 mm thick and 5 mm in diameter, were prepared from each material. Ten specimens from each material were placed on a photostimulable phosphor (PSP) plate system together with a tooth slice and the aluminum stepwedge. The images were analyzed with a software program (Adobe Photoshop) to measure mean gray values (MGVs). A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine whether there were significant differences among the groups. Tukey's test was applied for pairwise comparisons (p < 0.05).

Results: All materials used in the study showed greater radiopacity than dentin. BiOfactor, Dycal, MTA Angelus, ProRoot MTA were more radiopaque than enamel, while the other materials showed lower radiopacity than enamel. The radiopacity values of the materials were found as follows: Dentin < MTA CEM LC < Calcimol LC < Biodentin < TheraCal LC < Enamel < Dycal < BiOfactor < MTA Angelus < ProRoot MTA.

Conclusion: The materials examined were found to be more radiopaque than dentin. This may allow a more objective evaluation in radiographic examinations. However, in radiographic images in which enamel is superimposed, materials that do not exhibit greater radiopacity than enamel may complicate radiographic assessment.

不同盖髓材料的不透性比较。
背景/目的:本研究旨在比较牙髓盖盖材料与牙硬组织的放射性不透明度。在本研究中,我们检查了传统和现代牙髓盖盖材料的放射性,并与牙硬组织和铝台阶楔进行了比较。材料与方法:采用8种盖髓材料。每一种材料制备10个圆盘状标本,每个厚1 mm,直径5 mm。每种材料的10个标本与牙片和铝阶梯楔一起放置在光刺激荧光粉(PSP)板系统上。用Adobe Photoshop软件对图像进行分析,测量平均灰度值(MGVs)。采用单因素方差分析(ANOVA)确定各组间是否存在显著差异。采用Tukey检验两两比较(p)结果:研究中使用的所有材料均表现出比牙本质更大的放射性不透明。BiOfactor、Dycal、MTA Angelus、prooroot MTA比牙釉质更不透明,其他材料比牙釉质更不透明。结论:所检查的材料比牙本质更不透明。这可以在放射检查中进行更客观的评价。然而,在牙釉质叠加的x线摄影图像中,不表现出比牙釉质更大的放射性不透明的材料可能会使x线摄影评估复杂化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials
Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials BIOPHYSICS-ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials (JABFM) is an open access, peer-reviewed, international journal considering the publication of original contributions, reviews and editorials dealing with clinical and laboratory investigations in the fast growing field of biomaterial sciences and functional materials. The areas covered by the journal will include: • Biomaterials / Materials for biomedical applications • Functional materials • Hybrid and composite materials • Soft materials • Hydrogels • Nanomaterials • Gene delivery • Nonodevices • Metamaterials • Active coatings • Surface functionalization • Tissue engineering • Cell delivery/cell encapsulation systems • 3D printing materials • Material characterization • Biomechanics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书