Peramune Arachchilage Amila Saman Prasad Kumara

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.

Montmorillonite (MMT) is a biocompatible, cost-effective phyllosilicate mineral clay material with a nanolayered structure belonging to the smectite group. MMT is frequently used as an adsorbent catalyst in organic synthesis, food additives, cosmetics, medical applications and many other applications in varying industries. MMT has been incorporated into numerous experimental dental restorative materials as a reinforcing filler due to its high aspect ratio, forming interfacial solid bonds with the polymer matrix. The relatively high cation exchange capacity and layered structure of MMT pave the way as a medium for drug delivery systems. Furthermore, the incorporation of ions such as calcium, fluoride, silver, and zinc potentially increase the remineralization properties and antibacterial properties of MMT-based dental materials. Despite modern dental restorative materials having advanced significantly with innovations in material nanoscience, challenges such as biocompatibility, inadequate mechanical properties, marginal leakage, polymerization shrinkage, aesthetic concerns, and overall costs remain to be addressed. This review investigates the potential of montmorillonite (MMT) in dentistry, emphasizing its distinctive properties, composite formulations, and applications. It assesses the current state of research in these areas, aiming to highlight existing gaps in knowledge, emerging trends, and lesser-known applications of MMT-based materials. The review underscores MMT’s promise as an alternative material across various dental applications while noting the scarcity of research on completed products and in vivo clinical studies.

Introduction: Nothapodytes nimmoniana (Icacinaceae) is a rich source of Camptothecin (CPT), an anti‐cancer prodrug. Efficient extraction of CPT from various plant parts is crucial for better recovery of this pre‐drug.Objectives: To investigate the distribution of CPT in plant parts and to compare the methods of extraction on CPT yield to evaluate how cellular localisation affects the efficiency of extraction methods.Methods: Transverse sections of plant parts were observed under a ultraviolet (UV)‐fluorescence microscope for the fluorescence that the CPT molecule emits when exposed to UV radiation. Dried plant parts were extracted using 90% methanol with ultrasonic assistance, hot ethanol (61% ethanol at 60°C), and chloroform–methanol (4:1, v/v). The CPT in plant parts were detected by thin‐layer chromatography (TLC) and confirmed by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) and high‐performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Quantification was carried out by HPLC.Results: Blue fluorescence indicated a prominent accumulation of CPT in roots compared to leaf with petiole, twigs, and stembark. This accumulation was observed in upper and lower epidermis of the leaf, isolated strands of fibres in the phloem in the petiole, and groups of idioblast cells in the cortex. The ultrasonic‐assisted extraction with 90% methanol showed the highest CPT yield in the root (1.91 ± 0.02 mg/g of dry weight), followed by stembark and the least in leaves [0.02 ± 0.01 mg/g (dry weight)] irrespective of the method of extraction. However, hot ethanol extraction gave the highest CPT yield for twig and leaf, indicating the necessity of tissue‐specific extraction methods for better recovery of CPT.