Muna Saleem Khalaf
Abstract: The traditional approach to the treatment of traumatized immature non-vital teeth has been apexification by inducing the formation of mineralized tissue in the apical portion of incompletely formed apex. Several materials have been introduced in order to offer an apical barrier with biocompatible properties, not cytotoxic and promote induction of calcific bridge formation and periapical healing. The aim of this study is to compare the success rate of the use of MTA and biodentine in apexification and periapical healing of teeth with incomplete root formation and periapical infection. Materials and method 20 partially developed permanent maxillary incisors that have been traumatized were treated by apexification (10 treated using MTA and 10 treated using Biodentine). Root canals treated with both types of materials were obturated with gutta-percha. The patients were recalled at 1, 3, 6, and 12 monthly intervals for clinical evaluation and radiographic evaluation of the apical barrier formation and periapical healing. Results The follow up evaluation revealed clinical and radiographical success in all of the cases after a 12 month interval (100 %). Success involved no clinical signs or symptoms of pain or periodontal inflammation and complete healing of the periapical region with calcific barrier formation Conclusion Both Biodentine and MTA can be used for successful apexification treatment of immature non vital permanent teeth. Biodentine represents a great improvement compared to the other calcium silicate dental materials. In contrast with MTA, the mechanical properties of Biodentine are similar to those of natural dentine.
Keywords: apexification, immature teeth, MTA, Biodentine