## Abstract Previous studies revealed that primarily small and relatively hydrophilic comonomers, such as TEGDMA, leach out of resinโbased restorative materials into aqueous media. Subsequently, these compounds may cause detrimental reactions with intracellular metabolic systems. The present experi
Cytotoxic effects of dental desensitizers on human gingival fibroblasts
โ Scribed by A. Sengun; S. Buyukbas; S. S. Hakki
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2006
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 300 KB
- Volume
- 78B
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 1552-4973
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
โฆ Synopsis
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of three different desensitizers on the cell viability and morphology of human gingival fibroblasts (HGF). Human gingival tissues were obtained from individuals who have clinically, healthy periodontium. HGF were grown at 37ยฐC in humidified atmosphere of 5% CO~2~ in Dulbecco's modified eagle's medium, supplemented with glutamine, penicillin, streptomycin, and 10% fetal bovine serum. The cells were treated with different concentrations (0.1, 0.3, and 0.5 ฮผL/mL) of desensitizers (Gluma Desensitizer, Seal&Protect, and MicroPrime). After 24โ and 48โh exposure to the desensitizer solutions, the viable cells were examined using a hemocytometer. To monitor HGF viability, 3โ(4,5โdimethylโ2โthiazolyl)โ2,5โdiphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) colorimetric assay was used and cell morphology was also observed at 48 h. Following exposure to concentrations of 0.1 ฮผL/mL of test materials for 24 h, cell survival rates for Gluma Desensitizer (106%) and Micro Prime (62%) were not significantly different from the control, while it was significant for Seal&Protect (50%). Growing cells were significantly inhibited by all tested materials for 48 h (p < 0.05) in survival rates of 51, 47, and 31%, respectively. On the basis of the MTT assay, the cytotoxic effect of MicroPrime was more prominent, especially at high concentrations, than does Gluma Desensitizer and Seal&Protect. After exposure to Seal&Protect and MicroPrime, HGF became retracted, rounded in appearance and had loss of normal organization, leading to enlargement of intercellular space when compared with Gluma Desensitizer. As a conclusion, taking the limitations of an in vitro experiment into consideration, the cytotoxic effects were varied, depending on the chemical composition and exposure periods of the tested desensitizers. ยฉ 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 2006
๐ SIMILAR VOLUMES
## Abstract The present investigation was designed to test cellular toxicity of modern dentin adhesives. With the use of the products Ariston Liner, Etch & Prime 3.0, Optibond Solo, Prime & Bond NT, Scotchbond 1, and Syntac Sprint, test specimens were prepared according to the manufacturers' instru
Eight biomaterials eluted from four different types of dental restorative biomaterials, that is, from glass-ionomer cement (GIC: Ketac-fil and Fuji II), resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC: Fuji II LC and Photac-fil), composite (Z100 MP and Tetric-flow), and compomer (Compoglass F and F-2000
## Abstract ## Background and Objectives Lowโpower lasers improve wound healing. Cell proliferation and protein secretion are important steps of this process. The aim of this study was to analyze both protein synthesis and ultrastructural morphology of human gingival fibroblasts irradiated by a lo
## Abstract Various __in vitro__ studies have shown induction of apoptosis by monomers incorporated to dental restorative materials and adhesive resins, while information regarding the effect of monomer combinations as commercially available products on apopotis is limited. The aim of this study wa
After the article titled ''Effects of two multistep self-etch primer/adhesives on apoptosis in human gingival fibroblasts in vitro'' (jbm.b.30558