Andrea Schubert1, Christopher Ziegler1, Andrea Bernhard1, Ralf Bürgers1, Nicolai Miosge2. 1. Tissue Regeneration and Oral Biology Work Group, Department of Prosthodontics, Georg August University, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany. 2. Tissue Regeneration and Oral Biology Work Group, Department of Prosthodontics, Georg August University, Robert-Koch-Str. 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany. nmiosge@gwdg.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Tooth-colored composites have emerged as a standard restorative material in caries therapy and have largely replaced materials such as silver amalgam or glass ionomer cements. In addition to their superior esthetics and desirable mechanical properties, composites also comprise negative characteristics, such as wear, shrinkage, and an adverse biocompatibility. Modifications of classic resin-based dental composites have been developed to overcome these shortcomings. For example, ormocers are innovative inorganic-organic hybrid polymers that form a siloxane network modified by the incorporation of organic groups. Recently, a new ormocer, Admira Fusion (VOCO), was introduced to composite technology. The absence of cytotoxic matrix monomers leads to the hypothesis that ormocers have improved biocompatibility compared to resin-based dental restorative materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The aim of this study was to compare the cytotoxic effects of Admira Fusion to a nanohybrid composite (GrandioSO, VOCO) and a nanofiller composite (Filtek Supreme XTE, 3M Espe) on the standard dermal mouse fibroblasts (L929) and human gingival fibroblasts (GF-1) via a Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK-8) assay. RESULTS: Admira Fusion was significantly less cytotoxic than GrandioSO and Filtek Supreme XTE to both the standard mouse dermal fibroblasts (L929) and human gingival fibroblasts. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to other resin-based dental restorative materials, the ormocer (Admira Fusion) possesses a superior biocompatibility in vitro. Future research studies are needed to confirm our results. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinically, dental practitioners and their patients might benefit from Admira Fusion in terms of reduced adverse biologic reactions compared to resin-based dental restorative materials.
OBJECTIVES: Tooth-colored composites have emerged as a standard restorative material in caries therapy and have largely replaced materials such as silver amalgam or glass ionomer cements. In addition to their superior esthetics and desirable mechanical properties, composites also comprise negative characteristics, such as wear, shrinkage, and an adverse biocompatibility. Modifications of classic resin-based dental composites have been developed to overcome these shortcomings. For example, ormocers are innovative inorganic-organic hybrid polymers that form a siloxane network modified by the incorporation of organic groups. Recently, a new ormocer, Admira Fusion (VOCO), was introduced to composite technology. The absence of cytotoxic matrix monomers leads to the hypothesis that ormocers have improved biocompatibility compared to resin-based dental restorative materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The aim of this study was to compare the cytotoxic effects of Admira Fusion to a nanohybrid composite (GrandioSO, VOCO) and a nanofiller composite (Filtek Supreme XTE, 3M Espe) on the standard dermal mouse fibroblasts (L929) and human gingival fibroblasts (GF-1) via a Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK-8) assay. RESULTS: Admira Fusion was significantly less cytotoxic than GrandioSO and Filtek Supreme XTE to both the standard mouse dermal fibroblasts (L929) and human gingival fibroblasts. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to other resin-based dental restorative materials, the ormocer (Admira Fusion) possesses a superior biocompatibility in vitro. Future research studies are needed to confirm our results. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinically, dental practitioners and their patients might benefit from Admira Fusion in terms of reduced adverse biologic reactions compared to resin-based dental restorative materials.
Entities:
Keywords:
Biocompatibility; CCK-8; Composite; Human gingival fibroblasts; Mouse fibroblasts; Ormocer
Authors: Ralf Bürgers; Andrea Schubert; Jonas Müller; Sebastian Krohn; Matthias Rödiger; Andreas Leha; Torsten Wassmann Journal: Clin Exp Dent Res Date: 2022-05-15