Volume 7, Issue 2 (Journal of Research in Dental & Maxillofacial Sciences Spring 2022)                   J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci 2022, 7(2): 91-97 | Back to browse issues page


XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Moshari A, Esnaashari E, Eskandarion S, Safari B. Comparison of Cytotoxicity of AH Plus and DC Canal SE Sealer After Final Setting. J Res Dent Maxillofac Sci. 2022; 7 (2) :91-97
URL: http://jrdms.dentaliau.ac.ir/article-1-315-en.html
1- Department of Endodontics, Dental Material Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , Amirabbas.moshari@gmail.com
2- Department of Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Dental Material Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
4- Private Dentistry Practice, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (378 Views)

Background and Aim: This study aimed to compare the cytotoxicity of AH Plus and DC Canal SE sealer after final setting.
Materials and Methods: In this in vitro, experimental study, human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs) were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, 100 U/mL penicillin, and 100 µg/mL streptomycin, and incubated at 37°C and 5% CO2. Cells at a density of 5000 cells/well were seeded in a 96-well plate for the methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium (MTT) assay. The cells were incubated with AH Plus and DC Canal SE sealers. Specimens of freshly mixed sealers were fabricated with 4 mm height and 10 mm diameter, and  incubated at 37°C for 24 hours for setting. Each specimen was incubated with 10 mL of diluted culture medium at 37°C and 5% CO2 for 24 hours. Finally, the solution was filtered using a 0.22-µm filter. Different dilutions (1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8) were prepared, and cell viability was assessed at 24 and 72 hours by measuring the optical density of the solutions spectrophotometrically. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey’s test.
Results: Cell viability in presence of all concentrations of AH Plus and DC Canal SE was significantly lower at 72 hours compared with 24 hours (P<0.001). Cell viability in presence of AH Plus was significantly higher compared with DC Canal SE at all concentrations and time points.
Conclusion: Cell viability was higher in presence of AH Plus compared with DC Canal SE sealer in all concentrations and time points.

Full-Text [PDF 785 kb]   (116 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (105 Views)  
Type of Study: Original article | Subject: Oral medicine

References
1. Keiser K, Johnson CC, Tipton DA. Cytotoxicity of mineral trioxide aggregate using human periodontal ligament fibroblasts. J Endod. 2000 May;26(5):288-91. [DOI:10.1097/00004770-200005000-00010] [PMID]
2. Jung S, Sielker S, Hanisch MR, Libricht V, Schäfer E, Dammaschke T. Cytotoxic effects of four different root canal sealers on human osteoblasts. PLoS One. 2018 Mar 26; 13 (3):e0194467. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0194467] [PMID] [PMCID]
3. Cotti E, Petreucic V, Re D, Simbula G. Cytotoxicity evaluation of a new resin-based hybrid root canal sealer: an in vitro study. J Endod. 2014 Jan;40(1):124-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2013.09.038] [PMID]
4. Martinho FC, Camargo SEA, Fernandes AMM, Campos MS, Prado RF, Camargo CHR, Valera MC. Comparison of cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and immunological inflammatory biomarker activity of several endodontic sealers against immortalized human pulp cells. Int Endod J. 2018 Jan; 51 (1):41-57. [DOI:10.1111/iej.12785] [PMID]
5. Kim TG, Lee YH, Lee NH, Bhattarai G, Lee IK, Yun BS, Yi HK. The antioxidant property of pachymic acid improves bone disturbance against AH plus-induced inflammation in MC-3T3 E1 cells. J Endod. 2013 Apr;39(4):461-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2012.11.022] [PMID]
6. Benetti F, de Azevedo Queiroz ÍO, Oliveira PHC, Conti LC, Azuma MM, Oliveira SHP, Cintra LTA. Cytotoxicity and biocompatibility of a new bioceramic endodontic sealer containing calcium hydroxide. Braz Oral Res. 2019;33:e042. [DOI:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2019.vol33.0042] [PMID]
7. Camps J, About I. Cytotoxicity testing of endodontic sealers: a new method. J Endod. 2003 Sep;29(9):583-6. [DOI:10.1097/00004770-200309000-00010] [PMID]
8. Vouzara T, Dimosiari G, Koulaouzidou EA, Economides N. Cytotoxicity of a New Calcium Silicate Endodontic Sealer. J Endod. 2018 May;44(5):849-52. [DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2018.01.015] [PMID]
9. Silva EJ, Perez R, Valentim RM, Belladonna FG, De-Deus GA, Lima IC, Neves AA. Dissolution, dislocation and dimensional changes of endodontic sealers after a solubility challenge: a micro-CT approach. Int Endod J. 2017 Apr; 50 (4):407-14. [DOI:10.1111/iej.12636] [PMID]
10. Araki K, Suda H, Spångberg LS. Indirect longitudinal cytotoxicity of root canal sealers on L929 cells and human periodontal ligament fibroblasts. J Endod. 1994 Feb;20(2): 67-70. [DOI:10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81183-0]
11. Huang FM, Tai KW, Chou MY, Chang YC. Cytotoxicity of resin-, zinc oxide-eugenol-, and calcium hydroxide-based root canal sealers on human periodontal ligament cells and permanent V79 cells. Int Endod J. 2002 Feb;35(2):153-8. [DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00459.x] [PMID]
12. Lee DH, Lim BS, Lee YK, Yang HC. Mechanisms of root canal sealers cytotoxicity on osteoblastic cell line MC3T3-E1. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007 Nov;104(5):717-21. [DOI:10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.05.018] [PMID]
13. Kamalak H, Kamalak A, Taghizadehghalehjoughi A. Cytotoxic effects of new-generation bulk-fill composites on human dental pulp stem cells. Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand). 2018 Feb 28;64(3):62-71. [DOI:10.14715/cmb/2018.64.3.11] [PMID]
14. Heyder M, Kranz S, Völpel A, Pfister W, Watts DC, Jandt KD, Sigusch BW. Antibacterial effect of different root canal sealers on three bacterial species. Dent Mater. 2013 May; 29 (5):542-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.dental.2013.02.007] [PMID]
15. Leonardo MR, da Silva LA, Almeida WA, Utrilla LS. Tissue response to an epoxy resin-based root canal sealer. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1999 Feb;15(1):28-32. [DOI:10.1111/j.1600-9657.1999.tb00745.x] [PMID]
16. Mutoh N, Satoh T, Watabe H, Tani-Ishii N. Evaluation of the biocompatibility of resin-based root canal sealers in rat periapical tissue. Dent Mater J. 2013;32(3):413-9. [DOI:10.4012/dmj.2012-218] [PMID]
17. Saleh IM, Ruyter IE, Haapasalo M, Ørstavik D. Survival of Enterococcus faecalis in infected dentinal tubules after root canal filling with different root canal sealers in vitro. Int Endod J. 2004 Mar;37(3):193-8. [DOI:10.1111/j.0143-2885.2004.00785.x] [PMID]
18. Schäfer E, Bering N, Bürklein S. Selected physicochemical properties of AH Plus, EndoREZ and RealSeal SE root canal sealers. Odontology. 2015 Jan;103(1):61-5. [DOI:10.1007/s10266-013-0137-y] [PMID]
19. Tanomaru-Filho M, Tanomaru JM, Leonardo MR, da Silva LA. Periapical repair after root canal filling with different root canal sealers. Braz Dent J. 2009;20(5):389-95. [DOI:10.1590/S0103-64402009000500006] [PMID]
20. Wang Z, Shen Y, Haapasalo M. Dentin extends the antibacterial effect of endodontic sealers against Enterococcus faecalis biofilms. J Endod. 2014 Apr;40(4):505-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2013.10.042] [PMID]
21. Costa JA, Rached-Júnior FA, Souza-Gabriel AE, Silva-Sousa YT, Sousa-Neto MD. Push-out strength of methacrylate resin-based sealers to root canal walls. Int Endod J. 2010 Aug;43(8):698-706. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2010.01766.x] [PMID]
22. Scelza MZ, Linhares AB, da Silva LE, Granjeiro JM, Alves GG. A multiparametric assay to compare the cytotoxicity of endodontic sealers with primary human osteoblasts. Int Endod J. 2012 Jan;45(1):12-8. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01941.x] [PMID]
23. Graunaite I, Lodiene G, Arandarcikaite O, Pukalskas A, Machiulskiene V. Leachables and cytotoxicity of root canal sealers. J Oral Sci. 2018 Sep 23;60(3):381-7. [DOI:10.2334/josnusd.17-0173] [PMID]
24. van Meerloo J, Kaspers GJ, Cloos J. Cell sensitivity assays: the MTT assay. Methods Mol Biol. 2011;731:237-45. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-61779-080-5_20] [PMID]
25. Parirokh M, Forghani FR, Paseban H, Asgary S, Askarifard S, Esmaeeli Mahani S. Cytotoxicity of two resin-based sealers and a fluoride varnish on human gingival fibroblasts. Iran Endod J. 2015;10(2):89-92.
26. Karapınar-Kazandağ M, Bayrak OF, Yalvaç ME, Ersev H, Tanalp J, Sahin F, Bayırlı G. Cytotoxicity of 5 endodontic sealers on L929 cell line and human dental pulp cells. Int Endod J. 2011 Jul;44(7):626-34. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01863.x] [PMID]
27. Silva EJ, Rosa TP, Herrera DR, Jacinto RC, Gomes BP, Zaia AA. Evaluation of cytotoxicity and physicochemical properties of calcium silicate-based endodontic sealer MTA Fillapex. J Endod. 2013 Feb;39(2):274-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2012.06.030] [PMID]
28. Silva GO, Cavalcanti BN, Oliveira TR, Bin CV, Camargo SE, Camargo CH. Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of natural resin-based experimental endodontic sealers. Clin Oral Investig. 2016 May;20(4):815-9. [DOI:10.1007/s00784-015-1567-4] [PMID]
29. Bin CV, Valera MC, Camargo SE, Rabelo SB, Silva GO, Balducci I, Camargo CH. Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of root canal sealers based on mineral trioxide aggregate. J Endod. 2012 Apr;38(4):495-500. [DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2011.11.003] [PMID]
30. Lodienė G, Kopperud HM, Ørstavik D, Bruzell EM. Detection of leachables and cytotoxicity after exposure to methacrylate- and epoxy-based root canal sealers in vitro. Eur J Oral Sci. 2013 Oct;121(5):488-96. [DOI:10.1111/eos.12065] [PMID]
31. Oztan MD, Yilmaz S, Kalayci A, Zaimoğlu L. A comparison of the in vitro cytotoxicity of two root canal sealers. J Oral Rehabil. 2003 Apr;30(4):426-9. [DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2842.2003.01053.x] [PMID]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2022 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Research in Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb