to compare PA reactions as well as cementum regeneration in contact with amalgam, SuperEBA and MTA in dogs teeth using the undecalcified ground section technique.
Materials and Methods:
n: 5 beagle dogs n:24 roots, induction of PAL by placing paper points contaminated with plaque and sealed with IRM for 2 weeks, PAL formed between 4-6 wk. Teeth were then RC treated and apicectomy was done
under an OM. The resected roots were divided to 3 Gps (Gp.A: filled with Amalgam, Gp.B: Super EBA Gp. C: filled with MTA)
Dogs were sacrificed and jaws were sectioned, deminerlized, and stained with Giemsa solution. Contact-microradiographs were prepared. Sections were evaluated by two histologists.
¯Inflammation at tissues adjacent to the filling material was sig different between MTA & Super EBA to Amalgam
¯ MTA: minor degree of inflammatory cell infiltrates (Fig. 1C).
¯SuperEBA fillings: Moderate numbers of inflammatory cell infiltrates and some PMNs (Fig. 1B).
¯Amalgam: marked inflammatory cell infiltrate, composed primarily of PMNs (Fig. 1A).
¯A cementum-like material growing over the MTA in 7/9 sections and was sig diff to super EBA and Amalgam.
¯Two types of surface reactions over MTA were a crystalline-like structure (Fig. 2A) and newly deposited cementum (Fig. 2 B, C) that started mostly from the adjacent dentin, but was sometimes also found in islands, and finally appeared as mineralized cellular cementum.
MTA showed the most favorable periapical tissue response, with neoformation of cemental coverage over MTA