IADR Abstract Archives
Clinical Evaluation.
Abstract Body: Objectives:
To assess the current clinical endodontic status of hydraulic calcium silicate cements and to identify future perspectives.
Methods:
The literature was reviewed using PUBMED. For each clinical endodontic use of hydraulic calcium silicate cements, the clinical data were extracted and evaluated, based on the classification by Camilleri: intra-coronal, intra-radicular and extra-radicular.
Results:
From the 151 records identified, 51 met the eligibility criteria. Hydraulic calcium silicate cements have been mostly applied in vital pulp therapy (37 publications in the intra-coronal section), followed by root-end surgery (8 publications in the extra-radicular section) and subsequently intra-radicular in immature permanent teeth (6 publications).
Hydraulic calcium silicate cements:
do perform well for all endodontic treatment modalities and are comparable or superior to previous materials;
per endodontic treatment modality, the different hydraulic silicate cements applied, result in comparable (favourable) outcomes;
the most prominent adverse event is discolouration due to bismuth oxide in MTA;
there is lack of consensus regarding restoration (coronal/intracanalar);
the limitations in clinical trials are mainly investigator and/or operator related.
Conclusions:
Despite limitations, the hydraulic cements have made a difference in clinical outcomes in endodontics. Nevertheless, the clinical protocols need to be updated to enable the materials to be employed effectively.
To assess the current clinical endodontic status of hydraulic calcium silicate cements and to identify future perspectives.
Methods:
The literature was reviewed using PUBMED. For each clinical endodontic use of hydraulic calcium silicate cements, the clinical data were extracted and evaluated, based on the classification by Camilleri: intra-coronal, intra-radicular and extra-radicular.
Results:
From the 151 records identified, 51 met the eligibility criteria. Hydraulic calcium silicate cements have been mostly applied in vital pulp therapy (37 publications in the intra-coronal section), followed by root-end surgery (8 publications in the extra-radicular section) and subsequently intra-radicular in immature permanent teeth (6 publications).
Hydraulic calcium silicate cements:
do perform well for all endodontic treatment modalities and are comparable or superior to previous materials;
per endodontic treatment modality, the different hydraulic silicate cements applied, result in comparable (favourable) outcomes;
the most prominent adverse event is discolouration due to bismuth oxide in MTA;
there is lack of consensus regarding restoration (coronal/intracanalar);
the limitations in clinical trials are mainly investigator and/or operator related.
Conclusions:
Despite limitations, the hydraulic cements have made a difference in clinical outcomes in endodontics. Nevertheless, the clinical protocols need to be updated to enable the materials to be employed effectively.