Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The aim of this study was to compare the in vitro sealing ability of ProRoot MTA, ProRoot MTA (Tooth-Coloured Formula), ordinary Portland cement and white Portland cement when used as root-end filling materials. Twenty-four single-rooted human premolars were prepared and obturated using standard techniques, then retrofilled with the test materials. The prepared teeth were immersed in 1% methylene blue dye for 72 hours and then assessed for dye leakage. The depth of dye penetration was measured and expressed as a percentage of the length of the retrofilling. Data was analysed using ANOVA and Fisher's Least Significant Test (LSD) (p < 0.05). None of the teeth in any of the test groups showed leakage beyond the retrofillings. Given the low cost and apparently similar sealing ability of the cements, it is reasonable to consider Portland cement as a possible substitute for MTA as a root-end filling material. However, further tests, especially in vivo biocompatibility tests, need to be conducted before Portland cement can be recommended for clinical use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Islam et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: