# Assessment of sealing ability, antibacterial effect and marginal adaptation of bioactive materials in pulpotomized primary molars: an in-vitro study

## TL;DR

This study compares three bioactive materials for their ability to seal, prevent bacteria, and fit well in treated baby molars.

## Contribution

The study provides a direct comparison of MTA, Biodentine, and NeoPUTTY in terms of antibacterial effect, sealing, and marginal adaptation in primary molars.

## Key findings

- MTA showed higher bacterial leakage compared to Biodentine and NeoPUTTY.
- Biodentine and NeoPUTTY demonstrated superior antibacterial activity and marginal adaptation.
- Microgap width was significantly larger for MTA compared to NeoPUTTY but not Biodentine.

## Abstract

The success of pulpotomy depends on the restorative material’s ability to provide an effective seal, preventing bacterial penetration and growth within the root canal. This study was performed to compare three different types of calcium silicate-based cement in pulpotomized extracted primary molars considering antibacterial effect, sealing ability and marginal adaptation.

Recently extracted second primary molars were randomly categorized into three experimental groups (n = 10 each). Pulpotomy cavity preparations were made and pulp dressing materials were placed as follows: MTA (group I), Biodentine (group II) and NeoPUTTY (group III). All teeth were contaminated with Enterococcus faecalis and incubated for 21 days. One half of each molar was stained with the LIVE/DEAD BacLight Bacterial Viability Kit and evaluated using Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM) for observing live and dead bacteria based on fluorescence. The other half of each molar was used to measure the gap between pulp dressing material and the dentine walls using high-resolution Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (EESEM).

The tested bioactive materials significantly influenced the total bacterial count, with MTA showing the highest bacterial leakage when compared to both Biodentine and NeoPUTTY (p = 0.008, p = 0.012), respectively. The mean live bacterial load in the MTA group was significantly higher than in the Biodentine and NeoPUTTY groups (p < 0.0001). Microgap width of interfaces between MTA and dentine (9.88 ± 4.12) was significantly larger in comparison to NeoPUTTY and (7.44 ± 1.46) (p = 0.006), however the difference was non-significant compared to Biodentine (8.84 ± 3.99) (p = 0.356).

All the tested bioactive materials effectively inhibit the growth of bacteria. Biodentine and NeoPUTTY are promising and show favorable results for use as coronal pulpotomy dressing material owing to superior antibacterial activity, sealing, and marginal adaptation relative to MTA.