The Use of Premixed Calcium Silicate Bioceramic Sealer with Warm Carrier-Based Technique: A 2-Year Study for Patients Treated in a Master Program
Zamparini F., Spinelli A., Cardinali F., Ausiello P., Gandolfi MG., Prati C.
Case Report / Series with a reported sample of 85, published in J Funct Biomater (2023) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Case Report / Series
- Journal
- J Funct Biomater (2023)
- Reported sample size
- 85
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 36976088
- PMCID
- PMC10054578
- DOI
- 10.3390/jfb14030164
- Citations
- 29
Abstract (original English)
Background Recently several calcium silicate flowable sealers have been introduced as endodontic materials for the root canal. This clinical study tested the use of a new premixed calcium silicate bioceramic sealer in association with the Thermafil warm carrier-based technique (TF). Epoxy-resin-based sealer with the warm carrier-based technique was the control group. Methodology Healthy consecutive patients (n = 85) requiring 94 root canal treatments were enrolled in this study and assigned to one filling group (Ceraseal-TF n = 47, AH Plus-TF n = 47) in accordance with operator training and best clinical practice. Periapical X-rays were taken preoperatively, after root canal filling and after 6, 12 and 24 months. Two evaluators blindly assessed the periapical index (PAI) and sealer extrusion in the groups (k = 0.90). Healing rate and survival rate were also evaluated. Chi-square tests was used to analyze significant differences between the groups. Multilevel analysis was performed to evaluate the factors associated with healing status. Results A total of 89 root canal treatments in 82 patients were analyzed at the end-line (24 months). The total drop-out was 3.6% (3 patients; 5 teeth). A total of 91.1% of healed teeth (PAI 1-2) was observed in Ceraseal-TF, with 88.6% in AH Plus-TF. No significant difference was observed on healing outcome and survival among the two filling grou
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.
Evidence level
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.