A gas adsorption porosimetry analysis of Portland cement prepared by compaction vs. compaction with indirect ultrasonic agitation

Nader Azizi, Yltze P Cubas, Maria F Orellana


Background: Mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), is commonly used in endodontic and restorative procedures. Objective: Our objective was to introduce gas adsorption porosimetry as a viable method for evaluation of general porosity and specific pore characteristics of set Portland cement used in substitute for MTA, to investigate the effect of two different obturation methods (compaction and compaction in conjunction with indirect ultrasonic agitation of the cement paste), and to evaluate the correlation between the specific pore characteristics to compressive strength in general. Material and Methods: Portland cement samples were prepared and divided into two groups based on compaction techniques. An initial stereomicroscopic evaluation was done to assess any differences in appearance of pores randomly selected from either of the two experimental groups.  Specific pore characteristics and compressive strength were quantified by a gas adsorption porosimeter and an Instron universal testing machine. A two tailed student t-test was used for statistical comparison of data, and a regression analysis was done to evaluate the correlation between each specific pore characteristic and compressive strength in general. Results: The gas porosimetry method provided measurable values relating to specific pore characteristics of Portland cement.  The stereomicroscopy evaluation revealed marked differences between samples from the two groups, namely visibly larger pores both on the outside surface and in cross-sections of specimens prepared by the indirect ultrasonic activation method.  Conclusions: Gas adsorption porosimetry is a feasible method for evaluation of specific pore characteristics of Portland cement and potentially other dental materials as well.



Gas adsorption, porosimetry, Portland cement, compaction with ultrasonic agitation and indirect ultrasonic agitation

Full Text:



Evaluation of setting properties and retention characteristics of mineral trioxide aggregate when used as a furcation perforation repair material. Sluyk SR, Moon PC, Hartwell GR. J Endod. 1998 Nov;24(11):768-71. PMID: 9855831.

A comparison of MTA, Super-EBA, composite and amalgam as root-end filling materials using a bacterial microleakage model. Adamo, HL, Buruiana R, Schertzer L, Boyland RJ. Int Endod J. 1999 May;32(3):197-203. PMID: 10530207.

Leakage evaluation of root end filling materials using endotoxin. Tang HM, Torabinejad M, Kettering JD. J Endod. 2002 Jan;28(1):5-7. PMID: 11806652.

Dye leakage of four root end filling materials: effects of blood contamination. Torabinejad M, Higa RK, McKendry DJ, Pitt Ford TR. J Endod. 1994 Apr;20(4):159-63. PMID: 8035153.

Antibacterial effects of some root end filling materials. Torabinejad M, Hong CU, Pitt Ford TR, Kettering JD. J Endod. 1995 Aug;21(8):403-6. PMID: 7595152.

Reaction of rat connective tissue to implanted dentin tubes filled with a white mineral trioxide aggregate. Holland R1, Souza Vd, Nery MJ, Faraco Júnior IM, Bernabé PF, Otoboni Filho JA, Dezan Júnior E. Braz Dent J. 2002;13(1):23-6. PMID: 11870957.

A comparison of laterally condensed gutta-percha, thermoplasticized gutta-percha, and mineral trioxide aggregate as root canal filling materials. Bogen G. J Endod. 2004 Dec;30(12):826. PMID: 15564859.

A quantitative comparison of the fill density of MTA produced by two placement techniques. Yeung P1, Liewehr FR, Moon PC. J Endod. 2006 May;32(5):456-9. PMID: 16631848.

Porosity-dependence of effective mechanical properties of pore-solid composite materials. Pal R. J Compos Mater. 2005 Jun;39(13):1147-1158.

Flexural strength and porosity of cements. Birchall J, Howard AJ, Kendall K. Nature. 1981 Jan;289:388-390

Bye GC (1999). Portland Cement, 2nd edition: Composition, Production and Properties. United Kingdom:Thomas Telford Ltd. 248 p.

Placement of mineral trioxide aggregate using two different techniques. Aminoshariae A, Hartwell GR, Moon PC. J Endod. 2003 Oct;29(10):679-82. PMID: 14606796.

Comparative chemical study of MTA and Portland cements. Oliveira MG, Xavier CB, Demarco FF, Pinheiro AL, Costa AT, Pozza DH. Braz Dent J. 2007 18(1):3-7. PMID: 17639192.

Microstructure and strength of hydrated cement. Feldman RF, Beaudoin JJ. Cem Concr Res. 1976 May;6(3):398-400.

Mehta PK (1993). Concrete: Structure, Properties, and Materials. New York: Prentice Hall. 704 p.

Relationship between pore structure and mechanical properties of ordinary concrete under bending fatigue. Zhang B. Cem and Concr Res. 1998 May;28(5):699–711.

Compressive strength and pore structure of high-performance concrete after exposure to high temperature up to 800C. Chan Y, Luo X, Sun W. Cem Concr Res. 2000 30(2):247-251.

Asthana R, Kumar A, Dahotre N (2006). Materials Processing and Manufacturing Science, First Edition. United Kingdom: Butterworth-Heinemann. 656 p.

Aligizaki KK (2005). Pore Structure of Cement-Based Materials: Testing, Interpretation and Requirements. Boca Raton: CRC Press, LLC. 432 p.

Determination of pore size distribution and surface area of several materials using mercury porosimetry and gas adsorption. Tian Y, Chen Ke-fu. China Pulp and Paper. 2004-04.

The Characterization of Porous Solids from Gas Adsorption Measurements. Lee CK, Chiang AST, Tsay CS. Key Eng Mater. 1996 115:21-44.

Ultrasonic debridement of root canals: acoustic cavitation and its relevance. 1988. Ahmad M, Pitt Ford TR, Crum LA, Walton AJ. Int Endod J. 2009 May;42(5):391-8. PMID: 19356172.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/d3000.2014.24

Copyright (c)