Clinical question Is Biodentine better than MTA as a root-end filling material?Data sources Cochrane, PubMed-Medline and Scopus databases were searched independently by two authors. In addition, a manual search was performed in high-quality endodontic journals.Data extraction and synthesis The name of the authors, the year of publication, sample size, the measurement method used, follow-up time for each of the three and main outcomes (bond strength, marginal gap and sealing ability) were extracted in the form of tables and evidence presented. The level of scientific evidence was assessed using Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT).Quality of included studies Not performed.Results A total of 13 publications were included and all of them were in vitro studies. With regards to bond strength, two of four studies indicated Biodentine performed better than MTA while the other two showed no significant difference. Microleakage studies and sealing ability indicated no clear superiority of one over the other.Conclusions Lack of scientific evidence regarding the superiority of tricalcium silicate over mineral trioxide aggregate as a root-end filling material in periapical surgery.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to the British Dental Association.