Merve Çakırbay Tanış1, Canan Akay2, Handan Sevim3. 1. 1 Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey. 2. 2 Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey. 3. 3 Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cytotoxic effect of various denture base materials following four different aging periods. METHODS: In total, 48 disc-shaped specimens per each group were prepared: Group I: acrylic resin polymerized in cool water and heated up to 100°C over 45 min and boiled for 15 min; Group II: acrylic resin polymerized under pressure in 40°C-45°C water bath for 10 min; Group III: autopolymerized hard relining resin Cold Liner Rebase; Group IV: autopolymerized hard relining resin Truliner; Group V: soft relining resin DentuSil. Then the specimens were stored in water for 24 h or 15 days, or thermocycled 2500 times or 10,000 times. Cytotoxicity was evaluated with 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay using L929 cells after 72-h cell incubation. Cell viability percentages were counted and statistical analyses were performed. The results were also evaluated according to ISO standard 10993-5. RESULTS: All materials showed similar cell viability percentages following 24-h water storage and 2500 and 10,000 thermal cycles. Following 15-day water storage, a statistically significant difference was observed between the materials. Comparisons of the aging periods for each material showed statistically significant differences. Groups III and IV showed moderately cytotoxic effect following 15-day water storage. The remaining groups showed slightly cytotoxic or non-cytotoxic effect. DISCUSSION: Polymerizing acrylic resins under pressure can be an alternative to conventional polymerizing to ensure a faster denture repair while providing similar cell viability values. Heat-cured acrylic resins provide higher cell viability than hard chairside lining materials in a 15-day period.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cytotoxic effect of various denture base materials following four different aging periods. METHODS: In total, 48 disc-shaped specimens per each group were prepared: Group I: acrylic resin polymerized in cool water and heated up to 100°C over 45 min and boiled for 15 min; Group II: acrylic resin polymerized under pressure in 40°C-45°C water bath for 10 min; Group III: autopolymerized hard relining resin Cold Liner Rebase; Group IV: autopolymerized hard relining resin Truliner; Group V: soft relining resin DentuSil. Then the specimens were stored in water for 24 h or 15 days, or thermocycled 2500 times or 10,000 times. Cytotoxicity was evaluated with 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay using L929 cells after 72-h cell incubation. Cell viability percentages were counted and statistical analyses were performed. The results were also evaluated according to ISO standard 10993-5. RESULTS: All materials showed similar cell viability percentages following 24-h water storage and 2500 and 10,000 thermal cycles. Following 15-day water storage, a statistically significant difference was observed between the materials. Comparisons of the aging periods for each material showed statistically significant differences. Groups III and IV showed moderately cytotoxic effect following 15-day water storage. The remaining groups showed slightly cytotoxic or non-cytotoxic effect. DISCUSSION: Polymerizing acrylic resins under pressure can be an alternative to conventional polymerizing to ensure a faster denture repair while providing similar cell viability values. Heat-cured acrylic resins provide higher cell viability than hard chairside lining materials in a 15-day period.
Entities:
Keywords:
Acrylic resin; cytotoxicity; hard liner; soft liner; thermal cycle