Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This exploratory evaluation demonstrates lesion reduction in periapical inflammation using sodium iodide in canines, suggesting potential effectiveness.
Background and Objectives: Premature loss of primary teeth can disrupt occlusal development and oral function. Although iodoform-based materials such as Vitapex® are widely used, concerns remain regarding their cytotoxicity and potential to accelerate root resorption. Sodium iodide (NaI) has emerged as a biocompatible, antibacterial alternative. This study evaluated the feasibility of a NaI-based root canal filling material in a canine model of Enterococcus faecalis-induced periapical inflammation. Methods: Periapical lesions were induced in a healthy male mongrel dog using E. faecalis (106 CFU/mL). After six weeks, the root canals were obturated with NaI paste, Vitapex®, or Calcipex. Untreated teeth and an E. faecalis-only group served as controls. Radiographic lesion sizes were monitored at 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks post-obturation. Histological analysis at 16 weeks assessed inflammatory area and perimeter, stromal fibrosis, inflammatory cell infiltration, and myeloperoxidase (MPO) expression. Results: Radiographically, all treatment groups showed reduced lesion size relative to the positive control. No significant differences were observed among the NaI, Vitapex®, and Calcipex groups at 4 and 8 weeks; however, significant differences emerged at 12 and 16 weeks (p < 0.05). The NaI group showed lesion reduction until week 8, followed by subsequent expansion thereafter, whereas the Vitapex® and Calcipex groups showed continuous lesion reduction over time. Histologically, the periapical inflammatory area increased in the order of Vitapex® < Calcipex < NaI < positive control (p < 0.05). MPO staining identified neutrophils as the primary inflammatory cells. Conclusions: NaI paste showed favorable early radiographic healing but limited long-term stability compared with conventional materials. With further optimization, it may have potential as an alternative root canal filling material. However, given the single-animal exploratory design, these findings should be interpreted as preliminary rather than definitive evidence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jun et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: