Clinical and radiographic evaluation of NeoMTA versus conventional white mineral trioxide aggregate in revascularization of non-vital immature permanent anterior teeth (A randomized controlled trial)

ObjectiveTo evaluate and compare clinically and radiographically the effect of using two different coronal plug materials (NeoMTA versus Conventional White mineral trioxide aggregate) in revascularization of non-vital immature permanent anterior teeth, with special reference to the assessment and evaluation of discoloration potential over a period of one year.MethodsRevascularization procedure was performed in (30) immature permanent non-vital anterior teeth which were randomly allocated to two equal groups (n = 15). NeoMTA was used as coronal plug material in the Experimental Group (N), while conventional White mineral trioxide aggregate (WMTA) was used as a coronal plug material in the Control Group (W). All treated teeth were evaluated clinically at 1 week, 1, 3, and 12 months and radiographically at 12 months.ResultsThe overall clinical and radiographic success rate of Groups (N) and (W) at the end of the 12-month follow-up period was 100%. The discoloration was detected in a single tooth (9.1%) in Group (N) and three teeth (27.3%) in Group (W) but the difference between groups was not statistically significant.ConclusionsBoth NeoMTA and conventional WMTA were successful coronal plug materials in the revascularization of non-vital immature permanent teeth achieving a high level of clinical and radiographic success. NeoMTA is a promising coronal plug material that can be used for revascularization procedures in the esthetic zone as it showed less discoloration potential compared with conventional WMTA, however, there was no statistically significant difference between both materials.