Comparative Evaluation of Healing Outcomes Following Endodontic Microsurgery Using Bioceramic Versus MTA Root-End Filling Materials.

Authors

  • Singh H
  • De S
  • Katyan P
  • Sarkar O
  • Mehrotra K
  • Mukherjee S

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63682/jns.v14i32S.10345

Keywords:

Bioceramic materials, Endodontic microsurgery, Mineral Trioxide Aggregate, Periapical healing, Root-end filling, Surgical endodontics, Treatment outcome

Abstract

Background:Endodontic microsurgery is an established treatment modality for persistent periapical lesions when conventional root canal therapy fails. The choice of root-end filling material plays a critical role in achieving optimal healing outcomes. Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) has long been considered the gold standard, while newer bioceramic materials have demonstrated promising biological and sealing properties.

Aim:To compare the clinical and radiographic healing outcomes of MTA and bioceramic root-end filling materials following endodontic microsurgery.

Materials and Methods:This randomized clinical study included 30 patients diagnosed with persistent periapical pathology requiring endodontic microsurgery. Participants were randomly assigned into two groups: Group I (MTA, n = 15) and Group II (Bioceramic, n = 15). Clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed at 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively. Postoperative pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), while radiographic healing was evaluated using the Periapical Index (PAI). Clinical healing outcomes were categorized as complete healing, incomplete healing, or failure. Statistical analysis was performed using independent t-tests and chi-square tests, with significance set at p < 0.05.

Results:Baseline demographic characteristics were comparable between the groups (p > 0.05). Both groups demonstrated progressive reduction in postoperative pain throughout the follow-up period. Mean VAS scores were slightly lower in the bioceramic group at all intervals; however, no statistically significant differences were observed (p > 0.05). Radiographic assessment revealed a significant reduction in PAI scores over time in both groups. At 12 months, the bioceramic group exhibited significantly lower mean PAI scores compared with the MTA group (1.00 ± 0.38 vs. 1.40 ± 0.51; p = 0.027), indicating superior radiographic healing. Complete clinical healing at 12 months was observed in 80.0% of MTA-treated cases and 93.3% of bioceramic-treated cases, although the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.283). No treatment failures or persistent infections were reported in either group.

Conclusion:Both MTA and bioceramic materials were highly effective as root-end filling materials in endodontic microsurgery, resulting in high clinical success rates and favorable periapical healing. While both materials produced comparable clinical outcomes, bioceramic material demonstrated significantly better radiographic healing at 12 months, suggesting a potential advantage in promoting periapical tissue regeneration..

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Lindeboom JAH, Frenken JWFH, Kroon FHM, van den Akker HP. A comparative prospective randomized clinical study of MTA and IRM as root-end filling materials in single-rooted teeth in endodontic surgery. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005; 100(4):495–500. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.03.027. PMID: 16200680.

[2] Çalışkan MK, Tekin U, Kaval ME, Solmaz MC. The outcome of apical microsurgery using MTA as the root-end filling material: 2- to 6-year follow-up study. Int Endod J. 2016; 49(3):245–254. doi:10.1111/iej.12451. PMID: 25819748.

[3] Kim S, Song M, Shin SJ, Kim E. A Randomized Controlled Study of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and Super Ethoxybenzoic Acid as Root-end Filling Materials in Endodontic Microsurgery: Long-term Outcomes. J Endod. 2016 Jul; 42(7):997-1002. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.04.008. Epub 2016 May 20. PMID: 27215809.

[4] Abusrewil SM, McLean W, Scott JA. The use of Bioceramics as root-end filling materials in periradicular surgery: A literature review. Saudi Dent J. 2018 Oct; 30(4):273-282. doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2018.07.004. Epub 2018 Jul 24. PMID: 30202163; PMCID: PMC6128316.

[5] Kohli MR, Berenji H, Setzer FC, Lee SM, Karabucak B. Outcome of endodontic surgery: a meta-analysis of the literature—Part 3: comparison of endodontic microsurgical techniques with two different root-end filling materials. J Endod. 2018; 44(6):923–931. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2018.02.021. PMID: 29681480.

[6] Eskandar RF, Al-Habib MA, Barayan MA, Edrees HY. Outcomes of endodontic microsurgery using different calcium silicate-based retrograde filling materials: a cohort retrospective cone-beam computed tomographic analysis. BMC Oral Health. 2023 Feb 3; 23(1):70. doi: 10.1186/s12903-023-02782-w. PMID: 36737738; PMCID: PMC9896713.

[7] Ibáñez-Aravena PC, Sánchez-Sanhueza GA, Fernández CE. New bioceramics vs. Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) in the success of endodontic microsurgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aust Endod J. 2025; 51(3):609–618. doi:10.1111/aej.12974. PMID: 40637350.

[8] Torabinejad M, Hong CU, McDonald F, Pitt Ford TR. Physical and chemical properties of a new root-end filling material. J Endod. 1995 Jul; 21(7):349-53. doi: 10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80967-2. PMID: 7499973.

[9] Pramudita, Christian Eka; Iskandar, Bernard Ongki; Widyastuti, Wiena; Santosa, Didi Nugroho1. Efficacies of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and Bioceramic Root Canal Sealer with Two Types of Gutta-Percha toward the Apical Leakage. Scientific Dental Journal 4(1):p 11-15, Jan–Apr 2020. | DOI: 10.4103/SDJ.SDJ_41_19

[10] Rawat A, Geogi CC, Dubey S, Singh P. Bioceramics in endodontics – A review [Internet]. IP Indian J Conserv Endod. 2022 [cited 2026 May 31]; 7(4):163-171. Available from: https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijce.2022.037

[11] Torabinejad M, Corr R, Handysides R, Shabahang S. Outcomes of nonsurgical retreatment and endodontic surgery: a systematic review. J Endod. 2009 Jul; 35(7):930-7. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.023. PMID: 19567310.

[12] Tsesis I, Rosen E, Taschieri S, Telishevsky Strauss Y, Ceresoli V, Del Fabbro M. Outcomes of surgical endodontic treatment performed by a modern technique: an updated meta-analysis of the literature. J Endod. 2013 Mar; 39(3):332-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.044. Epub 2013 Jan 23. PMID: 23402503.

[13] Stropko JJ, Doyon GE, Gutmann JL. Root-end management: resection, cavity preparation, and material placement. Endod Topics. 2005; 11(1):131-151.

[14] Kim S, Kratchman S. Modern endodontic surgery concepts and practice: a review. J Endod. 2006 Jul; 32(7):601-23. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.12.010. Epub 2006 May 6. PMID: 16793466.

[15] Setzer FC, Shah SB, Kohli MR, Karabucak B, Kim S. Outcome of endodontic surgery: a meta-analysis of the literature--part 1: Comparison of traditional root-end surgery and endodontic microsurgery. J Endod. 2010 Nov; 36(11):1757-65. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.007. Epub 2010 Sep 17. PMID: 20951283.

[16] Dong X, Xu X. Bioceramics in Endodontics: Updates and Future Perspectives. Bioengineering (Basel). 2023 Mar 13; 10(3):354. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering10030354. PMID: 36978746; PMCID: PMC10045528.

[17] von Arx T, Jensen SS, Hänni S, Friedman S. Five-year longitudinal assessment of the prognosis of apical microsurgery. J Endod. 2012 May; 38(5):570-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.02.002. PMID: 22515881.

[18] Chao YC, Chen PH, Su WS, Yeh HW, Su CC, Wu YC, Chiang HS, Jhou HJ, Shieh YS. Effectiveness of different root-end filling materials in modern surgical endodontic treatment: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Dent Sci. 2022 Oct; 17(4):1731-1743. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2022.05.013. Epub 2022 Jun 8. PMID: 36299320; PMCID: PMC9588816.

[19] Çakmak YE, Er K. The role and clinical applications of bioceramic materials in modern endodontic practice: a review of the literature. Acta Stomatol Marisiensis. 2025;8(2):5-22. doi:10.62838/ASMJ.2025.2.02.

Downloads

Published

2025-11-07

How to Cite

1.
Singh H SH, De S DS, Katyan P KP, Sarkar O SO, Mehrotra K MK, Mukherjee S MS. Comparative Evaluation of Healing Outcomes Following Endodontic Microsurgery Using Bioceramic Versus MTA Root-End Filling Materials. J Neonatal Surg [Internet]. 2025 Nov. 7 [cited 2026 Sep. 5];14(32S):10942-50. Available from: https://jneonatalsurg.com/index.php/jns/article/view/10345

Issue

Vol. 14 No. 32S (2025): Journal of Neonatal Surgery

Section

Original Article

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

You are free to:

  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

Terms:

  • Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  • No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.