ArticleBMC oral health2025
Physicochemical evaluation of mineral trioxide aggregate and five mineral oxides calcium silicate-based cements.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFive mineral oxides (5MO, Golden Yatti LLC) is an endodontic calcium-silicate based repair cement. This study aimed to evaluate physicochemical properties, chemical composition and surface characterization of the 5MO material in comparison to White MTA (Angelus).
methodsThe setting time was evaluated using the Gillmore needle. The pH was measured with a pH-meter after 3, 12, 24 h, 3, 7, 14 and 21 days. Solubility was determined after immersion in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) for 7 days. Surface analysis of the cements was conducted using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and a coupled energy-dispersive spectroscopy (EDS), and other chemical analysis was performed through Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Data were analyzed using Student's t test (p ≤ 0.05).
resultsBoth materials had an alkaline pH in all periods analyzed; however, after 21 days, White MTA presented a higher pH (p ≤ 0.05). The 5MO material took longer to set and had greater solubility (p ≤ 0.05). Surface characterization using SEM/EDS highlighted distinct particle morphologies and elements, like carbon, oxygen, calcium, silicon, and other trace elements in 5MO and White MTA. FTIR analysis revealed an absorption band at 1400 cm⁻¹ associated with the C-O stretching of carbonate groups. The band at 3200 cm⁻¹ corresponds to the C-H vibrations, which is characteristic of hydrated ceramics.
conclusionWhile the 5MO material exhibits promising alkalinity and elemental composition favorable for tissue regeneration, its longer setting time and greater solubility in comparison to White MTA may compromise the integrity of the seal, promoting bacterial recontamination.
Indexed as
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.