Effects of Adper™ Scotchbond™ 1 XT, Clearfil™ SE Bond 2 and Scotchbond™ Universal in Odontoblasts

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the cytotoxicity of commercially available adhesive strategies—etch-and-rinse (Adper™ Scotchbond™ 1 XT, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA, SB1), self-etch (Clearfil™ SE Bond 2, Kuraray Noritake Dental Inc., Tokyo, Japan, CSE), and universal (Scotchbond™ Universal, 3M Deutschland GmbH, Neuss, Germany, SBU). MDPC-23 cells were exposed to adhesives extracts in different concentrations and exposure times. To access cell metabolic activity, viability, types of cell death, and cell cycle, the MTT assay, SRB assay, double labeling with annexin V and propidium iodide, and labeling with propidium iodide/RNAse were performed, respectively. Cultures were stained with May-Grünwald Giemsa for qualitative cytotoxicity assessment. The SB1, CSE, and SBU extracts determined a significant reduction in cell metabolism and viability. This reduction was higher for prolonged exposures, even for less concentrated extracts. CSE extracts significantly reduced the cell’s metabolic activity at higher concentrations (50% and 100%) from 2 h of exposure. After 24 and 96 h, a metabolic activity reduction was verified for all adhesives, even at lower concentrations. These changes were dependent on the adhesive, its concentration, and the incubation time. Regarding cell viability, SBU extracts were the least cytotoxic, and CSE was significantly more cytotoxic than SB1 and SBU. The adhesives determined a reduction in viable cells and an increase in apoptotic, late apoptosis/necrosis, and necrotic cells. Moreover, on cultures exposed to SB1 and CSE extracts, a decrease in the cells in S and G2/M phases and an increase in the cells in G0/G1 phase was observed. Exposure to SBU led to an increase of cells in the S phase. In general, all adhesives determined cytotoxicity. CSE extracts were the most cytotoxic and were classified as having a higher degree of reactivity, leading to more significant inhibition of cell growth and destruction of the cell’s layers.

In Vitro Characterization of Reversine-Treated Gingival Fibroblasts and Their Safety Evaluation after In Vivo Transplantation

“…The cell cycle was evaluated using flow cytometry, using labeling with propidium iodide (PI) and RNase for RNA removal [ 55 ]. Cell suspensions were fixed in vortex agitation with 70% ethanol (Sigma 24102, St. Louis, MO, USA) and incubated.…”