4.5 Article

Heavy Metal Analysis of Ortho MTA and ProRoot MTA

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS
Volume 37, Issue 12, Pages 1673-1676

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.08.020

Keywords

Arsenic; hexavalent chromium; inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry; lead; Ortho MTA; ProRoot MTA; purity

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
  2. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST) [2011-0014231, 2009-0086835, 2010-0029116]
  3. Samsung Biomedical Research Institute [SBRI C-B1-310-1]
  4. Samsung Medical Center [CRS-111-14-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Recently, several kinds of mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA)-based products have been introduced in endodontics. Ortho MTA (BioMTA, Seoul, Republic of Korea) is one of those products, which was developed for retrograde filling, perforation repair, orthograde root canal obturation, and direct pulp capping. The inclusion of heavy metals in MTA-based materials is of concern because they come into direct contact with hard and soft tissues. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the levels of arsenic (As), chromium (Cr), hexavalent chromium (Cr(6+)), and lead (Pb) in Ortho MTA and Pro Root MTA. Methods: One gram of each MTA was digested using a mixture of hydrochloric and nitric acids and filtered. The As, Cr, and Pb in the resulting filtrates were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry. The level of Cr(6+) was measured by the methods suggested in the Korean Standard L 5221. The results were statistically analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: The concentration of As in Pro Root MTA was 1.16 ppm, but As was not detected in Ortho MTA. Cr(6+) and Pb were not detected in either MTA. Ortho MTA contained significantly less Cr than Pro Root MTA (P <.05). Conclusions: Ortho MTA and Pro Root MTA meet the ISO specification 9917-1 regarding the safety limits of As and Pb and are safe biomaterials when the purity of As, Cr(6+), and Pb is considered. (J Endod 2011;37:1673-1676)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available