The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 25 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2024 ) > List of Articles


Comparative Evaluation of Push-out Bond Strength of Conventional Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, Biodentine, and Two Novel Antibacterial-enhanced Mineral Trioxide Aggregates

Arokia RS Merlin, Vignesh Ravindran, Prabhadevi C Maganur, Suman Panda, Ather A Syed, Sara Kalagi, Aram AlShehri, Sanjeev Khanagar, Satish Vishwanathaiah

Keywords : Antibacterial-enhanced mineral trioxide aggregate, Biodentine, Dental, Disease, Doxycycline, Metronidazole

Citation Information : Merlin AR, Ravindran V, Maganur PC, Panda S, Syed AA, Kalagi S, AlShehri A, Khanagar S, Vishwanathaiah S. Comparative Evaluation of Push-out Bond Strength of Conventional Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, Biodentine, and Two Novel Antibacterial-enhanced Mineral Trioxide Aggregates. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024; 25 (2):168-173.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3638

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 14-03-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Aim: To evaluate the push-out bond strength of two newly modified mineral trioxide aggregates (MTAs) with conventional MTA and biodentine. Materials and methods: Material preparation: Two commercially available bioactive bioceramics: Group I: Mineral trioxide aggregate; Group II: Biodentine; and two newly formulated modified MTAs: Group III: Doxycycline incorporated MTA formulation; Group IV: Metronidazole incorporated MTA formulation was used in the present study. All the test materials were then carried using a plastic instrument to the desired experimental design. Teeth sample preparation: A total of 120 teeth samples were collected and divided into four groups of test materials with 30 teeth samples per group. Single-rooted permanent teeth, that is, incisors were collected and stored in saline until the study was performed. Sectioning of the teeth into 2.0 ± 0.05-mm thick slices was performed perpendicular to the long axis of the tooth. The canal space was instrumented using Gates Glidden burs to achieve a diameter of 1.5 mm. All four prepared materials were mixed and placed in the lumen of the slices and placed in an incubator at 37°C for 72 hours. Push-out test and bond failure pattern evaluation: The push-out test was performed using a universal testing machine. The slices were examined under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) at 40× magnification to determine the nature of bond failure. All the collected data were recorded and statistically analyzed. Results: The mean push-out bond strength was found to be the highest for group II (37.38 ± 1.94 MPa) followed by group III (28.04 ± 2.22 MPa) and group IV (27.83 ± 1.34 MPa). The lowest mean push-out bond strength was noticed with group I (22.89 ± 2.49 MPa). This difference was found to be statistically significant (p = 0.000). Group I samples had the predominantly adhesive type of failure (86.4%), while group II samples showed the cohesive type of failure (94.2%). Both the modified MTAs (groups III and IV) primarily showed mixed types of failures. Conclusion: Both the antibacterial-enhanced MTAs had better pushout bond strength compared to conventional MTA but did not outperform biodentine. Hence, it could serve as a substitute for conventional MTA due to its augmented physical properties. Clinical significance: Carious pulp exposure and nonvital open apices pose a critical challenge to pediatric dental practitioners. In such circumstances, maintaining the vitality of pulp and faster healing would help in a better prognosis. Novel MTAs without any cytotoxic components, and enhanced antibacterial contents with augmented physical properties can help in treating such clinical conditions.

PDF Share
  1. Pushpalatha C, Dhareshwar V, Sowmya SV, et al. Modified mineral trioxide aggregate—A versatile dental material: An insight on applications and newer advancements. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2022;10:941826. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.941826.
  2. Moon HJ, Lee JH, Kim JH, et al. Reformulated mineral trioxide aggregate components and the assessments for use as future dental regenerative cements. J Tissue Eng 2018;9:2041731418807396. DOI: 10.1177/2041731418807396.
  3. Shin JH, Ryu JJ, Lee SH. Antimicrobial activity and biocompatibility of the mixture of mineral trioxide aggregate and nitric oxide-releasing compound. J Dent Sci 2021;16(1):29–36. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2020.07.018.
  4. Lim M, Yoo S. The antibacterial activity of mineral trioxide aggregate containing calcium fluoride. J Dent Sci 2022;17(2):836–841. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2021.09.005.
  5. Kuga MC, Duarte MA, Sant'anna–Júnior A, et al. Effects of calcium hydroxide addition on the physical and chemical properties of a calcium silicate-based sealer. J Appl Oral Sci 2014;22(3):180–184. DOI: 10.1590/1678-775720130032.
  6. Holt DM, Watts JD, Beeson TJ, et al. The anti-microbial effect against Enterococcus faecalis and the compressive strength of two types of mineral trioxide aggregate mixed with sterile water or 2% chlorhexidine liquid. J Endod 2007;33(7):844–847. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2007.04.006.
  7. Qiu W, Zhou Y, Li Z, et al. Application of antibiotics/antimicrobial agents on dental caries. Biomed Res Int 2020;2020:5658212. DOI: 10.1155/2020/5658212.
  8. Salehi G, Behnamghader A, Pazouki M, et al. Metronidazole-loaded glass ionomer dental cements. Int J Appl Ceram 2020;17:1985–1997. DOI: 10.1111/ijac.13480.
  9. Mirza M, Alhedyan F, Alqahtani A. Antibiotics in endodontics. J Dent Res Rev 2019,6:65–68. DOI: 10.4103/jdrr.jdrr_52_19.
  10. Nikhil V, Madan M, Agarwal C, et al. Effect of addition of 2% chlorhexidine or 10% doxycycline on antimicrobial activity of biodentine. J Conserv Dent 2014;17(3):271–275. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.131795.
  11. Akbulut MB, Bozkurt DA, Terlemez A, et al. The push-out bond strength of BIOfactor mineral trioxide aggregate, a novel root repair material. Restor Dent Endod 2019;44(1):e5. DOI: 10.5395/rde.2019.44.e5.
  12. Reyes–Carmona JF, Felippe MS, Felippe WT. Biomineralization ability and interaction of mineral trioxide aggregate and white Portland cement with dentin in a phosphate-containing fluid. J Endod 2009;35(5):731–736. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.02.011.
  13. Goracci C, Tavares AU, Fabianelli A, et al. The adhesion between fiber posts and root canal walls: Comparison between microtensile and push-out bond strength measurements. Eur J Oral Sci 2004;112(4):353–361. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2004.00146.x.
  14. Sousa–Neto MD, Coelho FIS, Marchesan MA, et al. Ex vivo study of the adhesion of an epoxy-based sealer to human dentine submitted to irradiation with Er:YAG and Nd:YAG lasers. Int Endod J 2005;38(12):866–870. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.01027.x.
  15. Alsubait SA, Hashem Q, AlHargan N, et al. Comparative evaluation of push-out bond strength of ProRoot MTA, bioaggregate and biodentine. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(3):336–340. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1539.
  16. Shahi S, Rahimi S, Yavari HR, et al. Effects of various mixing techniques on push-out bond strengths of white mineral trioxide aggregate. J Endod 2012;38(4):501–504. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.01.001.
  17. Aggarwal V, Singla M, Miglani S, et al. Comparative evaluation of push-out bond strength of ProRoot MTA, Biodentine, and MTA Plus in furcation perforation repair. J Conserv Dent 2013;16(5):462–465. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.117504.
  18. Ravindran V, Jeevanandan G. Comparative evaluation of the physical and antimicrobial properties of mineral trioxide aggregate, biodentine, and a modified fast-setting mineral trioxide aggregate without tricalcium aluminate: An in vitro study. Cureus 2023;15(8):e42856. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.42856.
  19. Paula A, Laranjo M, Marto CM, et al. Biodentine™Boosts, WhiteProRoot®MTA increases and Life®Suppresses odontoblast activity. Materials (Basel) 2019;12(7):1184. DOI: 10.3390/ma12071184.
  20. Bidar M, Naderinasab M, Talati A, et al. The effects of different concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate on the antimicrobial properties of mineral trioxide aggregate and calcium enrich mixture. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2012;9(4):466–471. PMID: 23162590.
  21. Lim M, Song M, Hong CU, et al. The biocompatibility and mineralization potential of mineral trioxide aggregate containing calcium fluoride: An in vitro study. J Dent Sci 2021;16(4):1080–1086. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2021.04.019.
  22. Ahmadi H, Ebrahimi A, Ahmadi F. Antibiotic therapy in dentistry. Int J Dent 2021;2021:6667624. DOI: 10.1155/2021/6667624.
  23. Al-Hiyasat AS, Yousef WA. Push-out bond strength of calcium silicate-based cements in the presence or absence of a smear layer. Int J Dent 2022;2022:7724384. DOI: 10.1155/2022/7724384.
  24. Singh S, Podar R, Dadu S, et al. An in vitro comparison of push-out bond strength of biodentine and mineral trioxide aggregate in the presence of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine gluconate. Endodontology 2016;28:42. DOI: 10.4103/0970-7212.184339.
  25. Guneser MB, Akbulut MB, Eldeniz AU. Effect of various endodontic irrigants on the push-out bond strength of biodentine and conventional root perforation repair materials. J Endod 2013;39(3):380–384. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.033.
  26. Ranjkesh B, Kopperud HM, Kopperud SE, et al. Bond strength between dentine and a novel fast-setting calcium silicate cement with fluoride. Eur J Oral Sci 2019;127(6):564–569. DOI: 10.1111/eos.12659.
  27. Saghiri MA, Shokouhinejad N, Lotfi M, et al. Push-out bond strength of mineral trioxide aggregate in the presence of alkaline pH. J Endod 2010;36(11):1856–1859. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.022.
  28. Shokouhinejad N, Nekoofar MH, Iravani A, et al. Effect of acidic environment on the push-out bond strength of mineral trioxide aggregate. J Endod 2010;36(5):871–874. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.12.025.
  29. Rahimi S, Ghasemi N, Shahi S, et al. Effect of blood contamination on the retention characteristics of two endodontic biomaterials in simulated furcation perforations. J Endod 2013;39(5):697–700. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.01.002.
  30. Han L, Okiji T. Uptake of calcium and silicon released from calcium silicate-based endodontic materials into root canal dentine. Int Endod J 2011;44(12):1081–1087. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01924.x.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.