An in vitro study of different material properties of Biodentine compared to ProRoot MTA.
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to compare solubility, microhardness, radiopacity, and setting time of Biodentine with ProRoot MTA.


METHODS
Solubility in distilled water, radioopacity, and setting time were evaluated in accordance with International Standard ISO 6876:2001. In addition, the solubility in Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS) buffer was determined. For microhardness-testing, ten samples of each cement were produced. All samples were loaded with a diamond indenter point with a weight of 100 g for 30s. All data were analysed using the Student-t-test.


RESULTS
Both materials fulfilled the requirements of the International Standard ISO 6876:2001 and showed a solubility of <3% after 24 h. At all exposure times Biodentine was significantly more soluble than ProRoot MTA (p < 0.0001). After immersion in PBS-buffer a precipitation of hydroxyapatite was visible. The Vickers microhardness for Biodentine was significantly higher (62.35 ± 11.55HV) compared with ProRoot MTA (26.93 ± 4.66HV) (p < 0.0001). ProRoot MTA was significantly more radiopaque (6.40 ± 0.06 mm Al) than Biodentine (1.50 ± 0.10 mm Al) (p < 0.0001). The setting time for Biodentine (85.66 ± 6.03 min) was significantly lower than for ProRoot MTA (228.33 ± 2.88 min) (p < 0.0001).


CONCLUSIONS
Biodentine and ProRoot MTA displayed different material properties. The solubility of both cements was in accordance with the International Standard ISO 6876:2001, whereas ProRoot MTA showed a significantly lower solubility. With regard to microhardness, Biodentine may be used to replace dentine. The radioopacity of Biodentine did not fulfil the requirements laid down in the International Standard ISO 6876:2001. The setting time for ProRoot MTA is significantly higher. Both materials can be used in different indications where specific material properties may be favourable. Hence, the here tested material properties are of clinical relevance.
Department of Operative Dentistry, Westphalian Wilhelms-University, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, building W 30, 48149, Münster, Germany. drkaup@drkaup.de.
Markus
M
Kaup
Central Interdisciplinary Ambulance in the School of Dentistry, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, building W 30, 48149, Münster, Germany. eschaef@uni-muenster.de.
Edgar
E
Schäfer
Department of Operative Dentistry, Westphalian Wilhelms-University, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, building W 30, 48149, Münster, Germany. tillda@uni-muenster.de.
Till
T
Dammaschke
D017607:Aluminum Compounds / Q000737:chemistry*; D017610:Calcium Compounds / Q000737:chemistry*; D004338:Drug Combinations; D006801:Humans; D066298:In Vitro Techniques; D008422:Materials Testing / Q000379:methods*; D010087:Oxides / Q000737:chemistry*; D012387:Root Canal Filling Materials / Q000737:chemistry*; D012494:Sampling Studies; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D017640:Silicates / Q000737:chemistry*; D012995:Solubility
D017607:Aluminum Compounds; D017610:Calcium Compounds; D004338:Drug Combinations; D010087:Oxides; D012387:Root Canal Filling Materials; D017640:Silicates; C086631:mineral trioxide aggregate; C506393:tricalcium silicate