Biomater Investig Dent. 2026 Jan 15;13:45038. doi: 10.2340/biid.v13.45038. eCollection 2026.
ABSTRACT
AIM: The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the sealing ability of Biodentine, zirconia reinforced glass ionomer cement (GIC), and Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) as furcation repair materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 50 extracted permanent maxillary molars were collected and divided into three experimental groups and one control group. Group I – Biodentine (n = 15), Group II – zirconia reinforced GIC (n = 15), Group III – MTA Angelus (n = 15), and unrepaired, control group (n = 5). Crowns of teeth in experimental groups were sectioned 3 mm above the cementoenamel junction and roots 3 mm below the furcation. Standardised endodontic access openings were prepared, canal orifices and root ends were sealed with sticky wax. After coating with nail varnish, a 1 mm furcation perforation was created at a standardised location using a round carbide bur. Samples were flushed, dried, and incubated at 37°C for 24 h to simulate clinical conditions. All samples were subjected to orthograde and retrograde methylene blue dye challenge followed by dye extraction with a concentration of 65% nitric acid. Samples were then analysed using 550 ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometers.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The results were analysed statistically by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s multiple comparison tests.
RESULT: No statistically significant difference in sealing ability was observed between Biodentine, zirconia reinforced GIC, and MTA when used as a furcation perforation repair material.
CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that Biodentine, zirconia reinforced GIC, and MTA showed sealing ability comparable to each other.
PMID:41568394 | PMC:PMC12817067 | DOI:10.2340/biid.v13.45038
