Inducing cathepsin L expression/production, lysosomal activation, and autophagy of human dental pulp cells by dentin bonding agents, camphorquinone and BisGMA and the related mechanisms

Chang, Mei‐Chi; Chen, Jen-Hao; Lee, Hui-Na; Chen, Shyuan-Yow; Zhong, Bor-Hao; Dhingra, Kunaal; Pan, Yu‐Hwa; Chang, Hung‐Hao; Chen, Yi-Jane; Jeng, Jiiang‐Huei

doi:10.1016/j.bioadv.2022.213253

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Adhesive systems typically contain a mixture of resin monomers, and it has been shown that these monomers have cytotoxicity and cellmodulating functions [21]. Studies conducted in vivo and in vitro have shown that the typical components of adhesive systems, TEGDMA, HEMA, bis-GMA, and 2,4,4-trimethylene diisocyanate (UDMA) monomers, exhibit time-and concentration-dependent cytotoxicity when used in deep cavities or proximity to the pulp tissue [22][23][24]. Bis-GMA is the most dangerous monomer regarding toxicity levels because it can impair protein synthesis and result in cell death [21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Cell Viability of Dentin-Bonding Adhesive Systems on Human Dental Pulp Stem Cells: Time-Dependent Analysis

Kazak,

Gungor,

Ozman

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Restorative materials are in prolonged contact with living tissues such as oral mucosa, dentin, pulp, periodontal, and periapical tissues. Therefore, the potentially harmful effects of these materials and their components on oral tissues should be evaluated before clinical use. This study aimed to compare the cell viability of different dentin-bonding adhesive systems (DBASs) on human dental pulp stem cells (hDPSCs). Methods Three DBASs that combining MDP monomer with new hydrophilic amide monomers [Clearfil Universal Bond Quick(CUBQ), Kuraray Noritake], self-reinforcing 3D monomer [Bond Force II(BFII), Tokuyama)], and dual-cure property [Futurabond DC(FBDC), VOCO] were used. Three (n = 3) samples were prepared for each group. Samples were incubated in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM) for 24 hours (h), 72 h, and 7 days (d) to obtain extracts. For the control group, cells were cultured without DBA samples. Cell viability of DBASs extracts was measured using a cell proliferation detection kit (WST-1, Roche). Statistical analysis was performed using two-way ANOVA and post-hoc (Duncan) tests (p < 0.05). Results At 24 and 72 h statistically significant differences were determined between control and BFII, control and FBDC groups (p < 0.05), while no differences between control and CUBQ groups (p > 0.05). On the 7th d, statistically significant differences were found between the control and experimental groups (p < 0.05), while no differences between experimental groups (p > 0.05). A statistically significant difference was detected for the BFII group over the three-time interval (p < 0.05). The lowest cell viability was observed for the FBDC group at 24 h, and the difference was statistically significant when compared with 72 h and 7th d (p < 0.05). Conclusion All DBASs showed different cell viability values at different contact times. In addition to the contents of DBASs, their pH should also be taken into account in terms of biocompatibility.

show abstract