Comparative analysis of the biological effects of the endodontic bioactive cements MTA-Angelus, MTA Repair HP and NeoMTA Plus on human dental pulp stem cells.
Thirty extracted primary molars were divided into five groups, each having two sets of three teeth (one first molar and two second molars). Pulpotomy and restorative options were randomly assigned: Biodentine plus Ketac Molar; NuSmile NeoMTA plus Tempit LC; NeoMTA Plus plus Fuji IX; MTA Angelus plus IRM capsule; MTA Flow plus IRM powder and liquid. After mixing one dose, pulp chambers of the first molar and one second molar were filled with a two-millimeter layer of bioactive cement and filling material (protocol A). The other second molar’s chamber was solo filled by a single mixed dose of bioactive cement (protocol B). The cost for each material was calculated independently, regardless of the group to which they belonged. A market assessment for primary molar crowns was performed, and a comparison table was produced.
For protocol A, the lowest mean cost per tooth (LMC) was obtained for NeoMTA cements and IRM powder and liquid; for solo bioactive cement pulp chamber filling, protocol (B), LMC was obtained for NeoMTA cements. Zirconia crowns were the costliest.
NeoMTA-type cements were the most cost-effective option for single-tooth pulpotomy. Zirconia crowns had the highest cost per tooth.