Quantitative evaluation of artifact expression in conebeam computed tomography of mesoporous calcium silicate nanoparticles as a promising root canal sealer

Objectives We aimed to quantitatively compare the area and volume of artifacts in cone beam computed tomography produced by mesoporous calcium silicate nanoparticles (MCSNs), AH Plus sealer, and iRoot SP sealer when used as root canal sealers. Methods We prepared 40 single-rooted mandibular premolars and divided them into an MCSN sealer group, an AH Plus sealer group, an iRoot SP sealer group, and a no-sealer (control) group. We filled the canals with gutta-percha using the single-cone method and subjected them to conebeam computed tomography before and after the placement of root fillings using the same exposure parameters. We evaluated the images to quantify the areas of hyperdense and hypodense artifacts and non-affected teeth and reconstructed 3-dimensional image models of the materials to study volume distortion artifacts. Results The MCSN sealer group produced a significantly smaller hyperdense and volume distortion artifacts than the AH Plus and iRoot SP groups (P < .01), but the area and volume of hypodense artifacts did not differ significantly among the groups (P > .05). Conclusions When used as a root canal sealer, MCSNs generate a significantly smaller area and volume of hyperdense artifacts than AH Plus and iRoot SP sealers. By significantly reducing the generation of high-density artifacts, MCSNs may facilitate the evaluation of root canal filling quality and the diagnosis of root canal abnormalities. We aimed to quantitatively compare the area and volume of artifacts in cone beam computed tomography produced by mesoporous calcium silicate nanoparticles (MCSNs), AH Plus sealer, and iRoot SP sealer when used as root canal sealers. We prepared 40 single-rooted mandibular premolars and divided them into an MCSN sealer group, an AH Plus sealer group, an iRoot SP sealer group, and a no-sealer (control) group. We filled the canals with gutta-percha using the single-cone method and subjected them to conebeam computed tomography before and after the placement of root fillings using the same exposure parameters. We evaluated the images to quantify the areas of hyperdense and hypodense artifacts and non-affected teeth and reconstructed 3-dimensional image models of the materials to study volume distortion artifacts. The MCSN sealer group produced a significantly smaller hyperdense and volume distortion artifacts than the AH Plus and iRoot SP groups (P < .01), but the area and volume of hypodense artifacts did not differ significantly among the groups (P > .05). When used as a root canal sealer, MCSNs generate a significantly smaller area and volume of hyperdense artifacts than AH Plus and iRoot SP sealers. By significantly reducing the generation of high-density artifacts, MCSNs may facilitate the evaluation of root canal filling quality and the diagnosis of root canal abnormalities.