Pankhuri Kochhar , Well, my limited knowledge tells me that it depends on the materials ability to induce reparative dentine formation. Biodentine/MTA/Ca(OH)2 all release Ca ion that can stimulate pulp to create dentine- there are several mechanisms apart from ion release as well. The first two has sufficient compressive strength to be used for long time, while Ca(OH)2 might be a temporary solution, if used for the same purpose.

Another thing is all of these material elicit immune response that actually starts the repair process, but if the immune response is sustained, it can produce negative outcome. To add more to the fact, I think the composite like materials are not still used as a direct replacement of Biodentine/MTA. The Biodentine/MTA are more suitable in case of direct pulp capping than indirect one. The recent composite materials might have ion releasing ability that is more related to antibiofilm property and remineralization of dentine than formation of reparative dentine formation. Although my knowledge is very limited on the development of new composite resins. I hope the answer helps you a bit. Thank you.

I think Ca(OH)2 still one of the most effective & cheep material we can count on.

i think its impossible to be better bacause the ratio of biocompatible particles in Mta /Bioceramics are higher than thats in biomemitic composites ..so its may be more favoeable than traditional composites

i don't believe that biomimetic resin composite could replace the role of biodentine or MTA. still need more researches about its efficacy in reparative dentin formation

I agree with Md Razi Saifullah Ibn Belal

Schmalz et al. (J Endod 2001) showed very nicely that only at