Triantafyllia Vouzara1, Garyfallia Dimosiari1, Elisabeth A Koulaouzidou2, Nikolaos Economides1. 1. Department of Dental Tissues Pathology and Therapeutics (Basic Dental Sciences, Endodontology and Operative Dentistry), School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece. 2. Department of Dental Tissues Pathology and Therapeutics (Basic Dental Sciences, Endodontology and Operative Dentistry), School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece. Electronic address: koulaouz@dent.auth.gr.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Resin sealers with biocompatible and bioactive additives have been used in clinical practice. Recently, a calcium silicate root canal sealer was introduced under the name BioRoot RCS (Septodont, Saint Maur-des-Fossés, France). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of BioRoot RCS on cell survival and proliferation of cultured cells in parallel with an epoxy resin sealer with calcium phosphate and calcium oxide and a salicylate resin sealer with mineral trioxide aggregate filler. The tested hypothesis was that BioRoot RCS is significantly less cytotoxic than the other tested sealers. METHODS: The experiments were performed on NIH/3T3 cells (American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA) grown as monolayer cultures at 37°C in atmosphere containing 5% CO2 in air and 100% relative humidity. The sealers' extracts (24 hours and 1 week) were applied to cells at 1:1 and 1:2 dilutions. The effect was assessed by a modified sulforhodamine B staining assay in reference to controls after 24 and 72 hours of exposure. All experiments were performed at least twice in 6 replicates. Analysis of variance and post hoc comparison tests were used to evaluate the statistical significance of the results at a level of significance of P = .05. RESULTS: BioRoot RCS was significantly less cytotoxic than the other 2 sealers. MTA-Fillapex (Angelus, Londrina, Brazil) and SimpliSeal (Discuss Dental, LLC, Calver City, CA) exhibited a similar antiproliferative profile with no statistically significant differences in all settings. CONCLUSIONS: BioRoot RCS showed quite a positive biological behavior. Further investigation is needed in order to clarify the mechanism and the components that contribute to the beneficial results observed.
INTRODUCTION: Resin sealers with biocompatible and bioactive additives have been used in clinical practice. Recently, a calcium silicate root canal sealer was introduced under the name BioRoot RCS (Septodont, Saint Maur-des-Fossés, France). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of BioRoot RCS on cell survival and proliferation of cultured cells in parallel with an epoxy resin sealer with calcium phosphate and calcium oxide and a salicylate resin sealer with mineral trioxide aggregate filler. The tested hypothesis was that BioRoot RCS is significantly less cytotoxic than the other tested sealers. METHODS: The experiments were performed on NIH/3T3 cells (American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA) grown as monolayer cultures at 37°C in atmosphere containing 5% CO2 in air and 100% relative humidity. The sealers' extracts (24 hours and 1 week) were applied to cells at 1:1 and 1:2 dilutions. The effect was assessed by a modified sulforhodamine B staining assay in reference to controls after 24 and 72 hours of exposure. All experiments were performed at least twice in 6 replicates. Analysis of variance and post hoc comparison tests were used to evaluate the statistical significance of the results at a level of significance of P = .05. RESULTS: BioRoot RCS was significantly less cytotoxic than the other 2 sealers. MTA-Fillapex (Angelus, Londrina, Brazil) and SimpliSeal (Discuss Dental, LLC, Calver City, CA) exhibited a similar antiproliferative profile with no statistically significant differences in all settings. CONCLUSIONS: BioRoot RCS showed quite a positive biological behavior. Further investigation is needed in order to clarify the mechanism and the components that contribute to the beneficial results observed.
Authors: Fernanda Ferrrari Esteves Torres; Reinhilde Jacobs; Mostafa EzEldeen; Juliane Maria Guerreiro-Tanomaru; Bernardo Camargo Dos Santos; Éverton Lucas-Oliveira; Tito José Bonagamba; Mario Tanomaru-Filho Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2020-01-21 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Sergio López-García; Adrián Lozano; David García-Bernal; Leopoldo Forner; Carmen Llena; Julia Guerrero-Gironés; José M Moraleda; Laura Murcia; Francisco J Rodríguez-Lozano Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2019-08-14 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Diogo Afonso Fonseca; Anabela Baptista Paula; Carlos Miguel Marto; Ana Coelho; Siri Paulo; José Pedro Martinho; Eunice Carrilho; Manuel Marques Ferreira Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 3.623