| Literature DB >> 29243186 |
Grzegorz Szczurko1, Małgorzata Pawińska2, Elżbieta Łuczaj-Cepowicz3, Anna Kierklo4, Grażyna Marczuk-Kolada3, Adam Hołownia5.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to compare ex vivo the toxic effects of six root canal sealers immediately after mixing or setting on human periodontal ligament fibroblasts (HPdLF). Freshly mixed (I group) or set (allowed to dry for 24 h) (II group) specimens of AH Plus Jet (AH), Apexit Plus (AP), MTA Fillapex (FL), GuttaFlow (GF), MetaSEAL Soft (META), and Tubli-Seal (TS) were prepared. HPdLF were exposed for 24 h to the specimens. 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazolo-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay was used to examine the effect of the root canal sealers on mitochondrial metabolic activity. Fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-annexin V (AnV) and propidium iodide staining followed by flow cytometry was used to identify the effects of the materials on cell apoptosis/necrosis. Statistical analyses were performed by one-way ANOVA followed by post hoc tests, and significance was determined at P < 0.05. Most materials from the two groups reduced the viability of the cultured cells compared with the control group (P < 0.05). Statistical analysis showed significant differences in HPdLF viability between the individual materials in each group (P < 0.001). AH and AP induced a significant increase in the percentage of apoptotic cells, while TS, FL, and META elevated the proportion of necrotic cells compared with other materials and the controls (p < 0.05). The cytotoxic effects of the tested root canal sealers (both fresh and set) on HPdLF varied. Both forms of sealers were able to cause toxic effects by inducing apoptosis and necrosis in HPdLF. The cytotoxicity of FL, META, TS was mainly associated with necrosis, while AH and AP with apoptosis.Entities:
Keywords: Cytotoxicity; Flow cytometry; MTT; Periodontal ligament fibroblasts; Root canal sealer
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29243186 PMCID: PMC5995990 DOI: 10.1007/s10266-017-0329-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Odontology ISSN: 1618-1247 Impact factor: 2.634
Compositions of materials tested for antibacterial activity
| Name | Source | Active ingredients |
|---|---|---|
| AH Plus™ (AH) | Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany | Bisphenol-A epoxy resin, bisphenol-F epoxy resin, calcium tungstate, zirconium oxide, silica, iron oxide pigments, dibenzyldiamine, aminoadamantane, tricyclodecane-diamine, silicone oil |
| Apexit® Plus (AP) | Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Lichtenstein | Calcium salts (hydroxide, oxide, phosphate), hydrogenised colophony, disalicylate, bismuth salts (oxide, carbonate), highly dispersed silicon dioxide, alkyl ester of phosphoric acid |
| GuttaFlow® (GF) | Coltene/Whaledent GmbH+Co. KG, Langenau, Germany | Gutta-percha powder, polydimethylosiloxane, silicone oil, platin catalyst, zirconium dioxide, nano-silver, coloring |
| MetaSEAL Soft (META) | Sun Medical, Tokyo, Japan | Liquid: 4-META, HEMA, difunctional methacrylate monomers |
| MTA Fillapex (FL) | Angelus Ind. de Prod. Odontolόgicos S/A, Londrina–PR–Brasil | Paste A: salicylate resin, bismuth trioxide, fumed silica |
| Tubli-Seal™ (TS) | Kerr Italia S.p.A., Salerno, Italy | Zinc oxide, barium sulfate, oleo resin, oils/modifiers, thymol iodide, eugenol |
Fig. 1Cell viability after 24-hour exposure to fresh (I group) and set (II group) materials. Data are shown as a mean ± standard deviation. Results are expressed as a percentage of cell viability in relation to the control group. P-values placed under the graph indicate significant differences between fresh and set materials
Fig. 2Representative two-dimensional dot plots of the flow cytometry data derived from FITC-AnV and PI-stained HPdLFs after 24-hour exposure to fresh materials. The dot plot represented the distribution of viable (lower left), early apoptotic (lower right), late apoptotic (upper right), and necrotic (upper left), respectively
Fig. 3Representative two-dimensional dot plots of the flow cytometry data derived from FITC-AnV and PI-stained HPdLFs after 24-hour exposure to set materials. The dot plot represented the distribution of viable (lower left), early apoptotic (lower right), late apoptotic (upper right), and necrotic (upper left), respectively
Fig. 4Effects of fresh materials on the viability of HPdLFs assessed using flow cytometry. The cytotoxicity was determined based on a comparison between the proportions of apoptotic and necrotic cell fractions, following the exposure of HPdLFs to the tested materials. The cumulative diagram shows the percentage of necrotic, early and late apoptotic, and viable cells (with standard deviation; SD). Significant differences with P < 0.05 after exposure of HPdLFs to fresh materials within the following cell population
Fig. 5Effects of set materials on the viability of HPdLFs assessed using flow cytometry. The cytotoxicity was determined based on a comparison between the proportions of apoptotic and necrotic cell fractions, following the exposure of HPdLFs to the tested materials. The cumulative diagram shows the percentage of necrotic, early and late apoptotic, and viable cells (with standard deviation; SD). Significant differences with P < 0.05 after exposure of HPdLFs to set materials within the following cell population