Till Dammaschke

Prof. Dr. Till Dammaschke

Department of Periodontology and Operative Dentistry, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, building W30, Waldeyerstr. 30, 48149 Münster, Germany
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

26Years (2001-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 August 2005 in Dental Materials
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Till DammaschkeTill Dammaschke
Till Dammaschke
HGHans U.V. Gerth
Hans U.V. Gerth
HZHarald Züchner
Harald Züchner
ESEdgar Schäfer
Edgar Schäfer

2 May 2015 in Head & Face Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MKMarkus Kaup
Markus Kaup
Edgar SchäferEdgar Schäfer
Edgar Schäfer
Till DammaschkeTill Dammaschke
Till Dammaschke
The aim of this study was to compare solubility, microhardness, radiopacity, and setting time of Biodentine with ProRoot MTA. Solubility in distilled water, radioopacity, and setting time were evaluated in accordance with International Standard ISO 6876:2001. In addition, the solubility in Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS) buffer was determined. For microhardness-testing, ten samples of each cement were produced. All samples were loaded with a diamond indenter point with a weight of 100 g for 30s. All data were analysed using the Student-t-test. Both materials fulfilled the requirements of the International Standard ISO 6876:2001 and showed a solubility of <3% after 24 h. At all exposure times Biodentine was significantly more soluble than ProRoot MTA (p < 0.0001). After immersion in PBS-buffer a precipitation of hydroxyapatite was visible. The Vickers microhardness for Biodentine was significantly higher (62.35 ± 11.55HV) compared with ProRoot MTA (26.93 ± 4.66HV) (p < 0.0001). ProRoot MTA was significantly more radiopaque (6.40 ± 0.06 mm Al) than Biodentine (1.50 ± 0.10 mm Al) (p < 0.0001). The setting time for Biodentine (85.66 ± 6.03 min) was significantly lower than for ProRoot MTA (228.33 ± 2.88 min) (p < 0.0001). Biodentine and ProRoot MTA displayed different material properties. The solubility of both cements was in accordance with the International Standard ISO 6876:2001, whereas ProRoot MTA showed a significantly lower solubility. With regard to microhardness, Biodentine may be used to replace dentine. The radioopacity of Biodentine did not fulfil the requirements laid down in the International Standard ISO 6876:2001. The setting time for ProRoot MTA is significantly higher. Both materials can be used in different indications where specific material properties may be favourable. Hence, the here tested material properties are of clinical relevance.

1 December 2016 in Journal of Endodontics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RPRaquel-Kathrin Prüllage
Raquel-Kathrin Prüllage
KUKent Urban
Kent Urban
ESEdgar Schäfer
Edgar Schäfer
Till DammaschkeTill Dammaschke
Till Dammaschke

15 August 2009 in Clinical Oral Investigations
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Till DammaschkeTill Dammaschke
Till Dammaschke
JLJana Leidinger
Jana Leidinger
ESEdgar Schäfer
Edgar Schäfer

25 May 2022 in International Endodontic Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
David DonnermeyerDavid Donnermeyer
David Donnermeyer
Till DammaschkeTill Dammaschke
Till Dammaschke
MLMariusz Lipski
Mariusz Lipski
Edgar SchäferEdgar Schäfer
Edgar Schäfer
Background: The diagnosis of the status of the inflamed pulp is essential in clinical diagnosis and treatment provision. There are a limited number of well‐designed and well‐executed clinical trials on the diagnosis of the true status of the pulp.Objectives: Three PICO questions were formulated and agreed a priori by the European Society of Endodontology to evaluate the clinical tests for sensibility testing, determination of biomarkers and pulp bleeding with regard to their suitability to correctly diagnose the condition of the pulp tissue for the development of S3‐Level guidelines.Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 21 January 2022. Additionally, a hand search was performed, and the contents of the major subject journals were also examined. Eligibility criteria followed the proposed PICO questions. Two independent reviewers were involved in study selection, data extraction and appraising the included studies; disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. The risk of bias was assessed by the QUADAS‐2 tool for diagnostic accuracy studies, the Newcastle–Ottawa scale for noncomparative, nonrandomized studies and the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment scale adapted for cross‐sectional studies.Results: In total, 28 studies out of 29 publications were considered eligible and were included in the review. Twelve studies were identified to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the pulp vitality. Ten studies fulfilled the criteria to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the pulpal conditions, while 6 studies investigating the expression of biomarkers were eligible. Three studies addressing the prognostic factors and therapeutic interventions relating to pulpal status were included.Discussion: The core problem in pulp diagnostics is that a reliable reference standard is lacking under clinical conditions. Based on limited evidence, the most promising current approach seems to define a combination of different clinical tests and symptoms, probably in future including molecular diagnosis (“diagnostic package”) will be required to ascertain the best possible strategy to clinically diagnose true pulpal conditions.Conclusions: The effectiveness of diagnosing pulpitis is low due to limited scientific evidence regarding the accuracy and reproducibility of diagnostic tests. There is a lack of evidence to determine the true status of the pulp or to identify prognostic indicators allowing for a reliable pre‐operative estimation of the outcome of vital pulp treatment.Registration: PROSPERO database (CRD42021265366).

20 August 2018 in Head & Face Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
David DonnermeyerDavid Donnermeyer
David Donnermeyer
PDPia Dornseifer
Pia Dornseifer
Edgar SchäferEdgar Schäfer
Edgar Schäfer
Till DammaschkeTill Dammaschke
Till Dammaschke
The aim was to compare the dislodgement resistance of calcium silicate-based sealers (Total Fill BC Sealer, Endo CPM Sealer, BioRoot RCS) with an epoxy resin-based sealer (AH Plus). The root canals of 80 single-rooted human teeth were instrumented with F360 up to size 45.04. All canals were obturated using matching gutta-percha cones according to the single-cone technique in combination with one of the mentioned sealers (n = 20 per group). After eight weeks of incubation (37 °C, 100% humidity), the roots were embedded in resin. Starting with a distance of 7 mm from the apex, four slices of 1 mm thickness were cut. Dislodgement resistance was measured using a universal testing machine and the push-out bond strength was calculated. Specimens were examined under 4×-magnification to determine the mode of bond failure. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls-test. Regarding the pooled data of all sections, the push-out bond strength of AH Plus was significantly higher than the push-out bond strength of all calcium silicate-containing sealers (P < 0.05). Out of all calcium silicate-based sealers, Total Fill BC Sealer showed the highest push-out bond strength (P < 0.05). BioRoot RCS had significant higher push-out bond strength than Endo CPM Sealer (P < 0.05). Nearly the same results were found for all four sections. BioRoot RCS only differed significantly from Endo CPM Sealer in the third section (P < 0.05). The push-out bond strength of the investigated calcium silicate-based sealers was lower than of AH Plus. Total Fill BC showed the highest push-out bond strength of the calcium silicate-based sealers.