ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2025
Biocompatibility and Bioactivity Evaluation of Novel Calcium Silicate-Based Sealer: In Vitro Study on Human Dental Pulp Stem Cells.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of dentine moisture conditions on interfacial adaptation of a calcium silicate-based sealer compared with an epoxy resin-based sealer: an SEM/EDX analysis.Biomaterial investigations in dentistry · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis article evaluates the biocompatibility and bioactivity of a novel calcium silicate-based sealer by assessing its impact on the viability, mineral deposition, wound closure, and migration activity of human dental pulp stem cells (hDPSCs). MATERIAL AND
methodsAH Plus and AH Plus Bioceramic were pulverized and sterilized according to International Organization for Standardization 10993-5:2009. The hDPSCs were stored raw materials, reaching 80% confluence after passing stem cell marker tests (CD90 98%, CD105 99.7%, CD73 94%, and LinNeg 0.5%) and were at passage 5 to 6 after serum starvation for 24 hours. The study consisted of four groups: AH Plus at concentrations of 1:1 and 1:4, and AH Plus Bioceramic at concentrations of 1:1 and 1:4. Viability was assessed using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay by measuring optical density values, while mineral deposition was evaluated through Alizarin red staining and analyzed with ImageJ software. Migration activity was measured by calculating migration speed and wound closure percentage using a scratch assay at 24 and 72 hours, with results analyzed by ImageJ. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Viability, migration, and wound closure results were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance. Mineral deposition was analyzed descriptively.
resultsThere were significant differences in the viability and mineral deposition of hDPSCs between calcium silicate-based sealers and epoxy resin-based sealers. Calcium silicate-based sealers showed higher viability and better mineral deposition. The migration speed rate of hDPSCs at 24 hours and wound closure at 24 and 72 hours were significantly greater with the novel calcium silicate-based sealer compared with the epoxy resin-based sealer.
conclusionThis study suggests that calcium silicate-based sealers offer advantages over traditional epoxy resin-based sealers, demonstrating superior biocompatibility and bioactivity. These properties may lead to improved clinical outcomes, such as faster healing and fewer posttreatment complications. Further research is needed to explore the full potential of these materials in endodontics.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.