| Literature DB >> 30642082 |
María Eugenia Cabaña-Muñoz1, José María Parmigiani-Izquierdo2, Fabio Camacho Alonso3,4, José Joaquín Merino5.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: the biological safety of dental biomaterials has been questioned in human studies.Entities:
Keywords: dental amalgams and titanium implants; free radicals and medicine; mercury, lipoperoxides (MDA); molybdenum (Mo), titanium (Ti); oligoelements; oxidative stress; toxicology of heavy metals
Year: 2019 PMID: 30642082 PMCID: PMC6352171 DOI: 10.3390/jcm8010086
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.241
Levels of heavy metals from amalgams (A), titanium dental implants and crowns (cobalt (Co), nickel (Ni) and chromium.
| Metal (µg/g Hair) | Control (Cont) | Amalgams (A) | Amalgams+ Implants (A + I) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hg2+ | 1.28 ± 0.51 | 2.72 ± 0.24 * | 2.67 ± 0.29 * | H = 8.4, |
| Sn | 0.3 ± 0.18 | 0.9 ± 0.32 | 0.57 ± 0.19 | H = 1.84, |
| Cu2+ | 29.1 ± 7.4 | 41.8 ± 12 | 29.1 ± 5.7 | H = 3.93, |
| Zn2+ | 185 ± 9.3 | 211 ± 12.8 * | 217 ± 7.4 * | H = 5.8, |
| Ti | 0.44 ± 0.037 | 0.47 ± 0.07 | 0.48 ± 0.065 | H = 1.02 |
| Al | 2.08 ± 0.1 | 4.88 ± 0.82 * | 3.37 ± 0.4 * | F = 14.5, |
| V | 0.058 ± 0.018 | 0.039 ± 0.0033 * | 0.028 ± 0.003 *,# | H = 11.63, |
| Ni | 0.13 ± 0.06 | 0.159 ± 0.04 | 0.39 ± 0.18 *,# | H = 6.6, |
| Co | 0.017 ± 0.0045 | 0.014 ± 0.0034 | 0.026 ± 0.0049 # | H = 13.9, |
| Cr | 0.35 ± 0.13 | 0.35 ± 0.013 | 0.35 ± 0.01 | F = 0.12, |
* p < 0.05 vs. Control # p < 0.05 vs. Amalgam. H, the Kruskal Wallis value; F, the data for ANOVA.
Figure 1Increased cobalt (Co) and lower molybdenum (Mo) and Vanadium (V) levels in patients with long-term dental titanium implants and amalgams (A + I) than those with long-term dental amalgams alone (A). Cont, Control.
Mean values for Mo, Fe2+, and Mo/Fe2+, Mo/Co ratios between groups (µg/g hair).
| Metal (µg/g Hair) | Control (Cont) | Amalgams (A) | Implants + Amalgams (A + I) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mo | 0.032 ± 0.0033 | 0.026 ± 0.007 | 0.024 ± 0.002 *,# | H = 9.14, |
| Fe2+ | 7.73 ± 0.58 | 7.42 ± 0.43 | 8.89 ± 0.5 # | H = 5.83, |
| Mo/Hg2+ | 0.026 ± 0.0045 | 0.017 ± 0.0022 * | 0.016 ± 0.003 * | H = 11.9, |
| Mo/Co | 5.13 ± 1.27 | 4.77 ± 0.59 | 2.17 ± 0.4 *,# | H = 10.89, |
| Mo/Fe2+ | 0.048 ± 0.037 | 0.042 ± 0.0017 | 0.015 ± 0.002 *,# | H = 15.13, |
* p < 0.05 vs. Control # p < 0.05 vs. Amalgam.
Figure 2The Mo/Co and Mo/Fe2+ ratios were significantly decreased in the A + I group as compared to those with long-term dental amalgams alone A (A) The Mo/Hg2+ ratio is significantly reduced in both experimental groups with dental biomaterials (A + I or A) as compared to controls. The Mo/Co ratio (B) as well as Mo/Fe2+ ratio (C) were significantly decreased in A + I patients as compared to those with long-term dental amalgams alone and controls (Cont).
Figure 3Higher systemic malondialdehyde (MDA) levels (A) and lower systemic taurine (pM) levels (B) in patients with long-term amalgams and dental titanium implants (A + I) and amalgams (A) alone.
Mean oligoelements ± standard error media (S.E.M) levels in hair for the study groups (Ca2+, Sr, S, Mn2+, Ge, I, P).
| Metal (µg/g Hair) | Control (Cont) | Amalgams (A) | Implants + Amalgams (A + I) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ca2+ | 722 ± 142 | 1096 ± 191 | 1695 ± 233 *, # | H = 9.51, |
| Sr | 8.7 ± 3.7 | 12 ± 3.3 | 17 ± 2.88 * | H = 6.09, |
| S | 48088 ± 426 | 47151 ± 386 | 47684 ± 286 | H = 3.83, |
| Mn2+ | 0.07 ± 0.06 | 0.094 ± 0.018 | 0.093 ± 0.007 | H = 0.12, |
| Ge | 0.028 ± 0.0011 | 0.029 ± 0.0006 | 0.03 ± 0.0007 | H = 0.94, |
| I | 1.03 ± 0.24 | 0.75 ± 0.16 | 0.87 ± 0.23 | H = 1.44, |
| P | 189 ± 7.26 | 182.2 ± 7.03 | 179 ± 4.61 | H = 79, |
* p < 0.05 vs. Control # p < 0.05 vs. Amalgam.
Heavy metals of environmental exposure among experimental groups.
| Metal (µg/g Hair) | Control (Cont) | Amalgams (A) | Implants + Amalgams (A + I) H (A + I, KW) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ba | 0.28 ± 0.04 | 0.57 ± 0.13 * | 0.92 ± 0.13 *,# | H = 15.77, |
| Pb | 0.2 ± 0.066 | 0.29 ± 0.063 | 0.7 ± 0.23 | H = 1.07, |
| Cd | 0.012 ± 0.0025 | 0.009 ± 0.0004 | 0.026 ± 0.015 | H = 3.18, |
| Sb | 0.01 ± 0.0046 | 0.012 ± 0.0027 | 0.013 ± 0.001 | H = 0.81, |
| As | 0.030 ± 0.0028 | 0.031 ± 0.0026 | 0.029 ± 0.004 | H = 1.6, |
| Pt | 0.06 ± 0.0091 | 0.064 ± 0.0077 | 0.068 ± 0.0026 | |
| Tl | 0.0010 ± 0.0006 | 0.0010 ± 0.0004 | 0.0011 ± 0.0006 | |
| Th | 0.0011 ± 0.0045 | 0.0010 ± 0.0085 | 0.0011 ± 0.005 | |
| U | 0.001 ± 0.0004 | 0.0011 ± 0.0008 | 0.0011 ± 0.0008 |
* p < 0.05 vs. Control # p < 0.05 vs. Amalgam.
Correlations between Mo/Hg2+, Mo/Co, Mo/Fe2+ ratios in the A + I group by r Pearson or r Spearman.
| Correlations r Pearson/Spearman | Mo/Co | Mo/Fe2+ |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
|
|
| |
|
| ||
|
|
| |
|
| ||
|
|
| |
|
|