4.5 Article

Heavy Metal Analysis of Ortho MTA and ProRoot MTA

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS
卷 37, 期 12, 页码 1673-1676

出版社

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

关键词

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

资金

  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]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据