MTT versus other cell viability assays to evaluate the biocompatibility of root canal filling materials: a systematic review

Abstract

Objectives This systematic review aimed to compare the cytotoxicity of root canal filling materials (RCFMs) assessed using tetrazolium salt‐based tests (TSBT), including the 3‐(4,5‐dimethylthiazol‐2‐yl)‐2,5‐diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, with those obtained using other cell viability assays. Methods A search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and OpenGrey up to March 2019, followed by a manual search. According to the Participants, Exposure, Comparator and Outcomes (PECO) criteria, in vitro studies that evaluated the cytotoxic effect of RCFMss on animal and/or human cells through TSBT and at least one other viability assay were compared. The methodological quality of selected papers was assessed using ToxRTool® and SciRAP®. Data were analysed using Wilcoxon’s signed‐rank test for paired samples and linear weighting kappa. Results A total of 230 non‐duplicated records were identified. After applying the eligibility criteria, 55 studies were selected for methodological evaluation, seven were selected by manual searching, 22 were excluded for methodological reasons, and 40 were included. A total of 410 comparisons were performed between TSBT and distinct cell viability tests (DCVT). MTT had moderate concordance with DCVT using human cells (n = 138 samples) (P = 0.507; k = 0.4225) and animal cells (n = 122 samples) (P = 0.124; k = 0.5775). XTT had good concordance using human (n = 110 samples) (P = 0.507; k = 0.6336) and animal cells (n = 12 samples) (P = 0.564; k = 0.6604). MTT, XTT, WST and MTS assays showed moderate concordance with DCVT (n = 410 samples) (P = 0.375; k = 0.5138) and complete agreement in 226 samples. Discussion The included studies had methodological heterogeneity that was minimized by the systematic review methodology. Conclusions MTT and XTT do not cause over‐ or underestimation of cell viability during cytotoxicity screening of root canal filling materials, implying that these assays can be considered reliable for this purpose. Nonetheless, the development of protocols for the cytotoxic screening of these materials on 3D tissue‐like cultures aiming to improve their predictability in the clinical scenario is suggested.

Biological parameters, discolouration and radiopacity of calcium silicate‐based materials in a simulated model of partial pulpotomy

“…Considering that the present study proposed to simulate the clinical situation of VPT, the evaluation of these materials was carried out using extracts of the materials (1:1–1:16) that mimic the contact of the materials with the pulp tissue, as the concentration decreases with the elimination of leachable components by the extracellular fluid (Mestieri et al, 2015). The analysis of cell viability at 24 h using MTT is a classical assay that is widely used to evaluate the cytotoxic effects of new materials (Ghilotti et al, 2020; López‐García et al, 2019; Mestieri et al, 2015), and it is considered the gold standard (Pintor et al, 2020).…”

Development from Jasminum sambac Flower Extracts of Products with Floral Fragrance and Multiple Physiological Activities

“…When the RO concentration was increased to 4,000 mg/L, clear effects were observed and the viability of CCD-966SK and HEMn cells was decreased to 82.5% ± 1.8% and 85.2% ± 1.6%, respectively. Although cell viability was affected by RO concentrations 2,000-4,000 mg/L compared with the control, RO was not toxic to the cells because cell viability remained ≥80% [34].…”

Comparative evaluation of the effect of cold ceramic and MTA-Angelus on cell viability, attachment and differentiation of dental pulp stem cells and periodontal ligament fibroblasts: an in vitro study

“…MTT has been shown as a reliable method for in-vitro cytotoxicity evaluation of materials used in endodontics [ 17 ]. Previous studies indicated that MTA Angelus has high biocompatibility [ 16 , 18 , 19 ].…”