Tooth-Saving showdown: which pulp capping material wins?
NCT ID NCT07562555
First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026
Summary
This study tested two materials, ProRoot MTA and Biofactor MTA, for direct pulp capping—a procedure to save a tooth's nerve after exposure. Eighty permanent teeth were treated, and patients reported pain levels for 48 hours. Success was checked at 6 and 12 months by looking for symptoms like pain or swelling and X-ray signs of infection. The goal was to see if Biofactor MTA works as well as the standard ProRoot MTA.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.
- Active substance
- ProRoot MTA and Biofactor MTA (calcium silicate-based materials used in dental procedures)
- What this could lead to
- If successful, this could show that Biofactor MTA is as effective as ProRoot MTA for preserving tooth vitality, offering a reliable alternative for dental pulp therapy.
- What could go wrong
- This is a small, completed study with 80 participants, so results may not apply to all patients. Long-term success beyond 12 months is unknown.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for VITAL PULP EXPOSURE IN PERMANENT TEETH are added.
By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
Ege University Faculty of Dentistry
Izmir, 35100, Turkey (Türkiye)
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.