Seok-Woo Chang1, So-Youn Lee2, Kee-Yeon Kum3, Eun-Cheol Kim4. 1. Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Maxillofacial Tissue Regeneration, Research Center for Tooth and Periodontal Regeneration (MRC), School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Conservative Dentistry, Dental Research Institute and BK 21 Program, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Maxillofacial Tissue Regeneration, Research Center for Tooth and Periodontal Regeneration (MRC), School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: eckim@khu.ac.kr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare the biocompatibility and odontogenic potential of newly developed Bioaggregate (BA) and Micromega MTA (MMTA) with ProRoot MTA (PMTA) and intermediate restorative material (IRM) by using human dental pulp cells. METHODS: Biocompatibility was assessed by an 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazolyl-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay and scanning electron microscopy. Differentiation was evaluated by alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, alizarin red staining, and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for the maker genes. The levels of inflammatory mediators and cytokines were measured by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: PMTA, BA, and MMTA exhibited equally good biocompatibility, whereas IRM showed cytotoxicity compared with these materials. PMTA, BA, and MMTA increased the ALP activity, promoted mineralization nodule formation, and enhanced the mRNA expression level of the osteogenic/odontogenic markers (ALP, osteopontin, osteocalcin, dentin sialophosphoprotein, and dentin matrix protein-1) compared with IRM. The levels of proinflammatory mediators and proinflammatory cytokines were lower in PMTA, BA, and MMTA compared with the IRM group. CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, the biocompatibility, odontogenic potentials, and inflammatory response of BA and MMTA are equal to those of PMTA and superior to those of IRM.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare the biocompatibility and odontogenic potential of newly developed Bioaggregate (BA) and Micromega MTA (MMTA) with ProRoot MTA (PMTA) and intermediate restorative material (IRM) by using human dental pulp cells. METHODS: Biocompatibility was assessed by an 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazolyl-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay and scanning electron microscopy. Differentiation was evaluated by alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, alizarin red staining, and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction for the maker genes. The levels of inflammatory mediators and cytokines were measured by reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: PMTA, BA, and MMTA exhibited equally good biocompatibility, whereas IRM showed cytotoxicity compared with these materials. PMTA, BA, and MMTA increased the ALP activity, promoted mineralization nodule formation, and enhanced the mRNA expression level of the osteogenic/odontogenic markers (ALP, osteopontin, osteocalcin, dentin sialophosphoprotein, and dentin matrix protein-1) compared with IRM. The levels of proinflammatory mediators and proinflammatory cytokines were lower in PMTA, BA, and MMTA compared with the IRM group. CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, the biocompatibility, odontogenic potentials, and inflammatory response of BA and MMTA are equal to those of PMTA and superior to those of IRM.