Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Dent. 2014 Jan 15;42(5):517–533. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.12.015

Table 2.

Studies on in vivo bioactivity (bone-bonding responses) hydraulic calcium silicate cements following intraosseous implantation.

Reference Material
investigated
Animal
model
Surgical
site
Number of
intra-osseous
implants
Time period
(days)
Delivery
Method
Results
New bone apposition
in direct contact
with material
Number (%)
New bone separated
from material by fibrous
connective tissue
Number (%)
Mixed (incomplete
direct bone contact)
Number (%)
132 Grey MTA Guinea pig Mandible   5 60 Teflon cup 1 (20%) 4 (80%) NA
133 Grey MTA Guinea pig Mandible 10 70 Teflon cup 1 (10%) 9 (90%) 0 (0%)
Tibia 11 80 5 (45.45%) 5 (45.45%) 1 (9.1%)
134 Grey MTA Rat Parietal bone 20 15 Freshly mixed; direct placement 0 (0%)a 20 (100%)c 0 (0%)b
18 30 0 (0%)a 14 (77.8%)c 4 (22.2%)b
18 60 2 (11.2%)a 8 (44.4%)c 8 (44.4%)b
135 Grey MTA Guinea pig Mandible 13 14 Teflon cup 8 (81.5%) 5 (38.5%) NA
13 84 7 (53.8%) 6 (46.2%)
Portland cement 13 14 7 (53.8%) 6 (46.2%)
13 84 10 (76.9%) 3 (23.1%)
136 Grey MTA Guinea pig Mandible 10 28 Teflon cup Unspecified specimen numbers–fibrous capsule (absent/slight), new bone in close contact with material (extensive) for both time periods. Negative control (empty Teflon cup)–thin fibrous capsule for both time periods.
12 84
137d Grey MTA Rat Femur 15   7 Freshly mixed; direct placement 15 (100%)c
15 28 15 (100%)b
15 56 15 (100%)a
a

Defined as extensive (complete coverage or "bridging" of the material surface with bone).

b

Defined as moderate (at least 50% of the material surface partially covered with bone).

c

Defined as slight (occasional islands of osteogenesis over the material surface; less than 25% of the material surface covered with bone).

d

Results questionable - negative control groups (no material placement in implant cavity) for each time period exhibited the same results as the experimental groups.