It was the purpose of this investigation to determine the cytotoxic effects (ED50 concentrations) of 35 monomers or additives identified in commercial dental resin composites. Monolayers of permanent 3T3 cells and three primary human fibroblast types derived from oral tissues (gingiva, pulp, and periodontal ligament) were used as test systems. All substances were tested in concentrations ranging from 0.01 to 5.0 mM. In general, ED50 values varied from 0.06 to > 5 mM. Within the groups of co(monomers), initiators, and cointiators, severe (e.g., Bis-GMA, UDMA, DMBZ, and DMDTA) or moderate (HEMA, BEMA, CQ, DMPT, and DMAPE) cytotoxic effects could be evaluated. Within the group of reaction/decomposition products, only moderate or slight effects were found (ED50: 0.7 to > 5 mM). The inhibitor BHT, the contaminant TPSb, and the photostabilizer HMBP, however, were highly cytotoxic in all cell cultures. In addition, the ED50 values of DBPO and HMBP significantly varied (0.43-3.8 mM, respectively, and 0.44-3.07 mM) with the applied cell culture. Our comprehensive screening shows that for several of the highly cytotoxic composite components, less cytotoxic alternatives are available. Furthermore, there was no cell type identified which was consistently less or more sensitive to the toxic effects of the tested compounds than the others. Primary human periodontal ligament and pulp fibroblasts, however, were found to be more sensitive than 3T3 and gingival fibroblasts to alterations from most tested substances.

No abstract

An increasing number of cavities in the primary and permanent dentition is restored with tooth-colored materials, especially dental resin composites or glass ionomer cements. Several investigations have revealed that various components are segregated from different composite filling materials into an aqueous environment after polymerization. Most organic substances can be extracted from a set resin by organic solvents (methanol, tetrahydrofuran, ethanol). Furthermore, in most studies, the co-monomer TEG-DMA has been identified as the main compound released from polymerized resin composites into aqueous media. However, small quantities of the monomers (Bis-GMA, UDMA) and other co-monomers, as well as additives, may also be released into water. Very little data have been published about substances released from various types of glass ionomer cements (GIC), except the liberation of fluoride. Erosion studies have revealed that there is a considerable disintegration of GICs at lower pH-values. However, the nature of the eroded substances has not yet been clarified. Altogether, the data presented in this review indicate that information is comparably scarce for resin composites and GICs in comparison to the rich amount of knowledge concerning amalgams. Therefore, further studies are necessary to determine quality and quantity of substances segregated from resin composites and GICs.

Increasing numbers of resin-based dental restorations have been placed over the past decade. During this same period, the public interest in the local and especially systemic adverse effects caused by dental materials has increased significantly It has been found that each resin-based material releases several components into the oral environment. In particular, the comonomer, triethyleneglycol di-methacrylate (TEGDMA), and the 'hydrophilic' monomer, 2-hydroxy-ethyl-methacrylate (HEMA), are leached out from various composite resins and 'adhesive' materials (e.g., resin-modified glass-ionomer cements IGICsl and dentin adhesives) in considerable amounts during the first 24 hours after polymerization. Numerous unbound resin components may leach into saliva during the initial phase after polymerization, and later, due to degradation or erosion of the resinous restoration. Those substances may be systemically distributed and could potentially cause adverse systemic effects in patients. In addition, absorption of organic substances from unpolymerized material, through unprotected skin, due to manual contact may pose a special risk for dental personnel. This is borne out by the increasing numbers of dental nurses, technicians, and aentists who present with allergic reactions to one or more resin components, like HEMA, glutaraldehyde, ethyleneglycol di-methacrylate (EGDMA), and dibenzoyl peroxide (DPO). However, it must be emphasized that, except for conventional composite resins, data reported on the release of substances from resin-based materials are scarce. There is very little reliable information with respect to the biological interactions between resin components and various tissues. Those interactions may be either protective, like absorption to dentin, or detrimental, e.g., inflammatory reactions of soft tissues. Microbial effects have also been observed which may contribute indirectly to caries and irritation of the pulp. Therefore, it is critical, both for our patients and for the profession, that the biological effects of resin-based filling materials be clarified in the near future,

No abstract

No abstract

In previous studies, light-cured glass-ionomer cements have been shown to evoke cytotoxic reactions. It was the purpose of this investigation (a) to determine the nature of the ingredients released into an aqueous medium from 2 light-cured glass-ionomer cements (GICs) and 3 compomers; (b) to evaluate the cytotoxicity of these extracts; and (c) to correlate the extent of the cytotoxic effects with eluted substances. Specimens of 2 light-cured GICs and 3 compomers were prepared and extracted in distilled water or cell culture medium for 24 hrs (surface-liquid ratio 42.4 mm2/mL). The aqueous eluates were analyzed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). The relative amounts of the components released from various products were compared by means of an internal caffeine standard [%CF]. For evaluation of cytotoxic effects, permanent 3T3 fibroblasts were incubated with medium extracts for 24 hrs. In addition, the ED50 concentration of the photoinitiator diphenyliodoniumchloride (DPICl) was determined. In all extracts, several water-elutable organic substances were found: (Co)monomers (especially HEMA and ethylene glycol compounds), additives (e.g., camphorquinone and diphenyliodoniumchloride), and decomposition products. The extracts of 3 products inhibited cell growth only moderately, whereas the light-cured GIC Vitrebond and the compomer Dyract Cem revealed severe cytotoxic effects. Vitrebond liberated the initiator DPICl, whereas Dyract Cem segregated a relatively high quantity [2966 %CF] of the comonomer TEGDMA in comparison with the other products. The present data show that TEGDMA and DPICl may be regarded as the prime causes for cytotoxic reactions evoked by the investigated light-cured glass-ionomer cements or compomers. Therefore, leaching of these substances should be minimized or prevented.

Previous studies have shown that extracts of various filling materials, e.g., resin composites, may influence the growth of cariogenic micro-organisms. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of important resin composite (co)monomers (Bis-GMA, UDMA, TEGDMA, EGDMA) and extracts of two commercial dental composites with similar composition (composite A, Arabesk; composite S, Superlux) on the growth of the two cariogenic bacterial pathogens Streptococcus sobrinus and Lactobacillus acidophilus. It was found that neither the monomers Bis-GMA and UDMA, nor the comonomer EGDMA, nor the extract of composite A influenced the growth of S. sobrinus in the log phase. The comonomer TEGDMA and the extract of composite S were found to stimulate growth in the log phase, but this stimulation was not statistically significant. However, EGDMA, TEGDMA, and the extract of composite S did stimulate the total growth of S. sobrinus. In the assays with L. acidophilus, Bis-GMA, UDMA, and the extract of composite A inhibited the growth in the log phase, whereas TEGDMA stimulated it. Furthermore, EGDMA, TEGDMA, and the extract of composite S stimulated the biomass production of L. acidophilus. We conclude from our results that a release of EGDMA and TEGDMA from resin composites should be avoided due to their growth-stimulating effects on the caries-associated micro-organisms S. sobrinus and L. acidophilus.