Annemarie Michel1, Ralf Erber2, Cornelia Frese3, Holger Gehrig1, Daniel Saure4, Johannes Mente5. 1. Clinic for Oral, Dental and Maxillofacial Diseases, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Division of Endodontics and Dental Traumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. 2. Clinic for Oral, Dental and Maxillofacial Diseases, Department of Orthodontics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 3. Clinic for Oral, Dental and Maxillofacial Diseases, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Division of Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, Ruprecht-Karls-University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 5. Clinic for Oral, Dental and Maxillofacial Diseases, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Division of Endodontics and Dental Traumatology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. Johannes.Mente@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Repair materials for extensive cervical root defects may come in direct contact with periodontal tissues. This in vitro study compared the effects of four calcium silicate cements (CSC), one resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and one glass carbomer cement on primary human gingival fibroblasts (HGF), alveolar osteoblasts (HAO), and a human osteoblast cell line (hFOB 1.19). METHODS: HGF, HAO, and hFOB were seeded on discoid test specimens. Relative numbers of viable cells were quantitatively assessed after 1 and 24 h for cytotoxicity/adhesion assays and after 4, 24, 48, and 72 h for proliferation assays. Data were statistically analyzed using non-parametric tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Relative to the control (100 %), CSC allowed for mean numbers of 71-81 % viable HGF and 80-82 % viable HAO. Then, 64 % of HGF and 56 % of HAO were assessed on GC Fuji II LC. Mean numbers of viable cells were 59-64 % HGF and 67-68 % HAO for GCP Glass Fill specimens. Cells exposed to CSC over 24 h remained viable and even increased in number. Both cell types adhered almost equally well to CSC and GC Fuji II LC. GCP Glass Fill continued to decrease cell viability and adhesion. CSC-based materials and GC Fuji II LC allowed for HGF and hFOB proliferation; however, none of the tested materials specifically stimulated cell proliferation. CONCLUSIONS: CSC characterized by low cytotoxicity. GC Fuji II LC shows moderate cytotoxic effects. ProRoot MTA, Harvard MTA, Biodentine, EndoSequence putty, and GC Fuji II LC allow HGF and HAO to adhere and HGF and hFOB to proliferate. GCP Glass Fill decreases cell viability, adhesion, and proliferation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: CSC remain the paramount biologic choice for the repair of extensive cervical root defects. GC Fuji II LC might be considered in addition to CSC when the defect comprises supracrestal areas and the restoration requires superior aesthetic and mechanical characteristics.
INTRODUCTION: Repair materials for extensive cervical root defects may come in direct contact with periodontal tissues. This in vitro study compared the effects of four calcium silicate cements (CSC), one resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and one glass carbomer cement on primary human gingival fibroblasts (HGF), alveolar osteoblasts (HAO), and a human osteoblast cell line (hFOB 1.19). METHODS:HGF, HAO, and hFOB were seeded on discoid test specimens. Relative numbers of viable cells were quantitatively assessed after 1 and 24 h for cytotoxicity/adhesion assays and after 4, 24, 48, and 72 h for proliferation assays. Data were statistically analyzed using non-parametric tests (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Relative to the control (100 %), CSC allowed for mean numbers of 71-81 % viable HGF and 80-82 % viable HAO. Then, 64 % of HGF and 56 % of HAO were assessed on GC Fuji II LC. Mean numbers of viable cells were 59-64 % HGF and 67-68 % HAO for GCP Glass Fill specimens. Cells exposed to CSC over 24 h remained viable and even increased in number. Both cell types adhered almost equally well to CSC and GC Fuji II LC. GCP Glass Fill continued to decrease cell viability and adhesion. CSC-based materials and GC Fuji II LC allowed for HGF and hFOB proliferation; however, none of the tested materials specifically stimulated cell proliferation. CONCLUSIONS: CSC characterized by low cytotoxicity. GC Fuji II LC shows moderate cytotoxic effects. ProRoot MTA, Harvard MTA, Biodentine, EndoSequence putty, and GC Fuji II LC allow HGF and HAO to adhere and HGF and hFOB to proliferate. GCP Glass Fill decreases cell viability, adhesion, and proliferation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: CSC remain the paramount biologic choice for the repair of extensive cervical root defects. GC Fuji II LC might be considered in addition to CSC when the defect comprises supracrestal areas and the restoration requires superior aesthetic and mechanical characteristics.
Entities:
Keywords:
Calcium silicate cements; Cytotoxicity; Glass carbomer cements; In vitro testing; Primary human cell culture; Resin-modified glass ionomer cements
Authors: Thiago M Martins; Alvaro F Bosco; Fernando J O Nóbrega; Maria J H Nagata; Valdir G Garcia; Stephen E Fucini Journal: J Periodontol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 6.993
Authors: Cornelius von Wilmowsky; Eleftherios Vairaktaris; Dirk Pohle; Thomas Rechtenwald; Rainer Lutz; Helmut Münstedt; Garrit Koller; M Schmidt; Friedrich Wilhelm Neukam; Karl Andreas Schlegel; Emeka Nkenke Journal: J Biomed Mater Res A Date: 2008-12-15 Impact factor: 4.396
Authors: Frangis Nikfarjam; Kim Beyer; Anke König; Matthias Hofmann; Manuel Butting; Eva Valesky; Stefan Kippenberger; Roland Kaufmann; Detlef Heidemann; August Bernd; Nadja Nicole Zöller Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-12-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sergio López-García; María P Pecci-Lloret; Miguel R Pecci-Lloret; Ricardo E Oñate-Sánchez; David García-Bernal; Pablo Castelo-Baz; Francisco Javier Rodríguez-Lozano; Julia Guerrero-Gironés Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 3.623