Prasad Kumara Peramune Arachchilage Amila Saman, Cooper Paul Roy, Cathro Peter, Gould Maree, Dias George, Ratnayake Jithendra
Sir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand.
Department of Anatomy, School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Otago, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand.
Dent J (Basel). 2025 Apr 1;13(4):157. doi: 10.3390/dj13040157.
Bioceramic materials for endodontic treatments have gradually transformed over the years into materials with enhanced biocompatibility and chemical and mechanical properties compared to earlier generations. In endodontics procedures, these materials are used as restorative material in applications such as root-end fillings, pulp capping, perforations repair, and apexification repair procedures. However, they have far from ideal mechanical and handling properties, biocompatibility issues, aesthetic concerns due to tooth discolouration, limited antibacterial activity, and affordability, which are amongst several key limitations. Notably, bioceramic materials are popular due to their biocompatibility, sealing ability, and durability, consequently surpassing traditional materials such as gutta-percha and zinc oxide-eugenol sealers. A lack of recent advancements in the field, combined with nanomaterials, has improved the formulations of these materials to overcome these limitations. The existing literature emphasises the benefits of bioceramics while underreporting their poor mechanical properties, handling difficulties, cost, and various other drawbacks. The key gaps identified in the literature are the insufficient coverage of emerging materials, narrow scope, limited insights into future developments, and underreporting of failures and complications of the existing materials. Consequently, this review aims to highlight the key limitations of various endodontic materials, primarily focusing on calcium silicate, calcium phosphate, and bioactive glass-based materials, which are the most abundantly used materials in dentistry. Based on the literature, bioceramic materials in endodontics have significantly improved over recent years, with different combinations of materials and technology compared to earlier generations while preserving many of their original properties, with some having affordable costs. This review also identified key innovations that could shape the future of endodontic materials, highlighting the ongoing evolution and advancements in endodontic treatments.
多年来，用于牙髓治疗的生物陶瓷材料已逐渐转变为与早期材料相比具有更高生物相容性以及化学和机械性能的材料。在牙髓治疗程序中，这些材料被用作修复材料，应用于根尖充填、牙髓盖髓、穿孔修复和根尖诱导成形修复程序等。然而，它们在机械性能和操作性能、生物相容性问题、牙齿变色引起的美观问题、抗菌活性有限以及价格可承受性等方面远非理想，这些都是几个关键的局限性。值得注意的是，生物陶瓷材料因其生物相容性、密封能力和耐久性而受到欢迎，从而超越了传统材料，如牙胶和氧化锌丁香酚封闭剂。该领域缺乏与纳米材料相结合的最新进展，已经改进了这些材料的配方以克服这些局限性。现有文献强调了生物陶瓷的优点，却较少提及它们较差的机械性能、操作困难、成本以及各种其他缺点。文献中发现的关键差距在于对新兴材料的报道不足、范围狭窄、对未来发展的见解有限以及对现有材料的失败和并发症报道不足。因此，本综述旨在突出各种牙髓材料的关键局限性，主要关注硅酸钙、磷酸钙和生物活性玻璃基材料，这些是牙科中使用最广泛的材料。基于文献，牙髓治疗中的生物陶瓷材料近年来有了显著改进，与早期材料相比，材料和技术有不同的组合，同时保留了许多原始特性，有些还具有可承受的成本。本综述还确定了可能塑造牙髓材料未来的关键创新，突出了牙髓治疗中不断的演变和进展。
