Evaluation of cytotoxicity of six different flowable composites with the methyl tetrazolium test method

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the cytotoxicity of six different flowable composites with the methyl tetrazolium test (MTT). Materials and Methods: For MTT, six different flowable composites (Bisco Aelite, Bisco Inc., USA; Esthet X Flow, Dentsply, USA; Filtek™ Supreme XT Flowable Restorative, 3M Espe, USA; Gradia ® Direct Flo, GC, USA; Estelite ® Flow Quick, Tokuyama Dental Corporation, Japan; and Clearfil Majesty Flow, Kuraray Medical Inc., Japan) were prepared according to the manufacturer’s instructions in standard Teflon disks (2 mm × 5 mm) and the samples were extracted in 7 ml of Basal Medium Eagle with 10% new born calf serum and 5% penicillin streptomycin gentamisin for 24 h. In the experiments: The L929 cells were plated (25.000 cells/ml) in wells of 96 well-dishes and maintained in a humidified incubator for 24 h at 37°C, 5% CO 2 , and 95% of air. After 24 h incubation of the cells, the incubation medium was replaced by the immersed medium in which the samples were stored. Then L929 cells were incubated in contact with evaluates for 24 h. The cell mitochondrial activity was evaluated by the MTT. 12 well used for each specimen and MTT tests applied 2 times. The data were submitted to the statistically analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s honestly significant difference (HSD) tests. Results: According to the results of MTT test with L-929 fibroblasts demonstrated that all freshly prepared flowable composites did not reduce vital cell numbers (P>0.05) in comparison to control group. Conclusion: This study revealed important information for clinical applications of flowable composites in dentistry.

Cytotoxicity of Light-Cured Dental Materials according to Different Sample Preparation Methods

“…In addition, all resin monomers exhibited a dose-dependent genotoxicity [ 7 , 14 , 26 , 27 , 28 ]. Furthermore, it has been reported that unreacted resin-based materials may release substances into an aqueous environment for extended periods, possibly causing cell damage and pulpal inflammation [ 8 , 18 ]. These findings suggest that a cytotoxicity test is suitable for the evaluation of basic biocompatibility [ 24 ].…”

“…Because groups 2 and 3 had the same eluents, the extracts were divided as follows: “Uncured”, “Post-cured”, and “Removed unreacted layer”. Despite the limitation of extraction for hydrophobic material used in this study, choice of eluent was based on previous studies [ 2 , 8 , 18 ] and consideration of cellular experiment. The appropriate amount of each sample was added to a culture medium (RPMI 1640; Gibco, Grand Island, NY, USA) supplemented with 10% FBS inside a sterilized glass bottle.…”

“…However, these studies differed in sample preparation methods, cell lines, application methods, and types of products. Perhaps most importantly, different products undergo different degrees of conversion and, thus, produce different amounts of monomer extract, thereby leading to large variations in cytotoxicity [ 10 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Therefore, standardized sample preparation and curing procedures are necessary to assess the actual toxicity of dental resin-based materials.…”

In vitro Testing of Experimental and Commercial Bracket Bonding Materials

“…The human Quantikine Active Caspase-3 and TNFα Immunoassay kits from R&D Systems, Inc (USA) were used. Cell extracts and, respectively supernatants were treated as indicated by the producer, readings were done at 450 nm with correction wavelength set at 540 nm, using an ELISA plate reader (Tecan, Switzerland) [8][9][10][11].…”

“…Substances released from orthodontic composites may cause a reaction (inflammation or necrosis) to adjacent tissues, such as oral mucosa, gingiva or alveolar bone. There are different ways in which materials may influence the health of soft tissues: by delivering watersoluble components into the saliva and the oral cavity as well as by directly interacting with adjacent tissues [11]. The orthodontic adhesives were tested in vitro, on cell cultures to simulate the clinical setting as closely as possible.…”