不同生物陶瓷封闭剂的细胞毒性

Asmaa Ahmed Desouky, Mohamed Badawy Badawy, Weaam Anous
{"title":"不同生物陶瓷封闭剂的细胞毒性","authors":"Asmaa Ahmed Desouky, Mohamed Badawy Badawy, Weaam Anous","doi":"10.21608/edj.2024.267865.2923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: This study seeks to assess the cytotoxic impact of various bioceramic sealers, namely Well-Root ST, CeraSeal, and NeoSEALER Flo, in comparison to AH Plus sealer. The evaluation encompasses both the fresh and set states of these sealers, employing the MTT assay on human periodontal ligament fibroblasts. Materials and methods: Following the manufacturers’ instructions, the four tested sealers were blended in a sterile environment and then placed into standardized plastic rings. Extracts derived from the tested sealers were applied to human periodontal ligament fibroblasts. The freshly mixed sealers were examined immediately after mixing, with their extracts prepared at that moment. On the other hand, the remaining specimens, designated as set specimens, were incubated in a humidified environment with 5% CO2 and 95% air at 37º C for 24 hours before extraction to create extracts of the tested sealers. The extracted material was then diluted with DMEM to achieve twelve distinct concentrations of each extract 50%, 25%, 12.5%, 6.25%, 3.12%, 1.56%, 0.78%, 0.4%, 0.2%, 0.1%, 0.05%, and 0.025%. The cytotoxicity of all root canal sealers was evaluated using the MTT assay, followed by the calculation of cell viability percentages. Results: AH Plus showed the highest toxicity followed by the NeoSEALER Flo then Well-Root ST and the least toxicity was CeraSeal. Conclusion: The assessed root canal sealers exhibited differing levels of cytotoxicity, and the rise in cell viability percentages was contingent on the concentration.","PeriodicalId":11504,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian dental journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cytotoxicity of Different Bioceramic Sealers\",\"authors\":\"Asmaa Ahmed Desouky, Mohamed Badawy Badawy, Weaam Anous\",\"doi\":\"10.21608/edj.2024.267865.2923\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: This study seeks to assess the cytotoxic impact of various bioceramic sealers, namely Well-Root ST, CeraSeal, and NeoSEALER Flo, in comparison to AH Plus sealer. The evaluation encompasses both the fresh and set states of these sealers, employing the MTT assay on human periodontal ligament fibroblasts. Materials and methods: Following the manufacturers’ instructions, the four tested sealers were blended in a sterile environment and then placed into standardized plastic rings. Extracts derived from the tested sealers were applied to human periodontal ligament fibroblasts. The freshly mixed sealers were examined immediately after mixing, with their extracts prepared at that moment. On the other hand, the remaining specimens, designated as set specimens, were incubated in a humidified environment with 5% CO2 and 95% air at 37º C for 24 hours before extraction to create extracts of the tested sealers. The extracted material was then diluted with DMEM to achieve twelve distinct concentrations of each extract 50%, 25%, 12.5%, 6.25%, 3.12%, 1.56%, 0.78%, 0.4%, 0.2%, 0.1%, 0.05%, and 0.025%. The cytotoxicity of all root canal sealers was evaluated using the MTT assay, followed by the calculation of cell viability percentages. Results: AH Plus showed the highest toxicity followed by the NeoSEALER Flo then Well-Root ST and the least toxicity was CeraSeal. Conclusion: The assessed root canal sealers exhibited differing levels of cytotoxicity, and the rise in cell viability percentages was contingent on the concentration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Egyptian dental journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Egyptian dental journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21608/edj.2024.267865.2923\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/edj.2024.267865.2923","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评估各种生物陶瓷封闭剂(即 Well-Root ST、CeraSeal 和 NeoSEALER Flo)与 AH Plus 封闭剂相比的细胞毒性影响。评估包括这些封闭剂的新鲜和凝固状态,采用 MTT 法对人类牙周韧带成纤维细胞进行检测。材料和方法:按照制造商的说明,在无菌环境中混合四种测试封闭剂,然后将其放入标准塑料环中。将从测试封闭剂中提取的提取物应用于人类牙周韧带成纤维细胞。新鲜混合的封闭剂在混合后立即进行检测,其提取物也是在混合时制备的。另一方面,其余的标本被指定为固定标本,在提取前在 5%的二氧化碳和 95%的空气混合的 37º C 加湿环境中培养 24 小时,以提取受测封闭剂的提取物。然后用 DMEM 稀释提取物,使每种提取物的浓度分别达到 50%、25%、12.5%、6.25%、3.12%、1.56%、0.78%、0.4%、0.2%、0.1%、0.05% 和 0.025%。所有根管封闭剂的细胞毒性均采用 MTT 法进行评估,然后计算细胞存活率。结果显示AH Plus 的毒性最高,其次是 NeoSEALER Flo,然后是 Well-Root ST,毒性最低的是 CeraSeal。结论所评估的根管封闭剂具有不同程度的细胞毒性,细胞存活率的上升取决于浓度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cytotoxicity of Different Bioceramic Sealers
Aim: This study seeks to assess the cytotoxic impact of various bioceramic sealers, namely Well-Root ST, CeraSeal, and NeoSEALER Flo, in comparison to AH Plus sealer. The evaluation encompasses both the fresh and set states of these sealers, employing the MTT assay on human periodontal ligament fibroblasts. Materials and methods: Following the manufacturers’ instructions, the four tested sealers were blended in a sterile environment and then placed into standardized plastic rings. Extracts derived from the tested sealers were applied to human periodontal ligament fibroblasts. The freshly mixed sealers were examined immediately after mixing, with their extracts prepared at that moment. On the other hand, the remaining specimens, designated as set specimens, were incubated in a humidified environment with 5% CO2 and 95% air at 37º C for 24 hours before extraction to create extracts of the tested sealers. The extracted material was then diluted with DMEM to achieve twelve distinct concentrations of each extract 50%, 25%, 12.5%, 6.25%, 3.12%, 1.56%, 0.78%, 0.4%, 0.2%, 0.1%, 0.05%, and 0.025%. The cytotoxicity of all root canal sealers was evaluated using the MTT assay, followed by the calculation of cell viability percentages. Results: AH Plus showed the highest toxicity followed by the NeoSEALER Flo then Well-Root ST and the least toxicity was CeraSeal. Conclusion: The assessed root canal sealers exhibited differing levels of cytotoxicity, and the rise in cell viability percentages was contingent on the concentration.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness Of Smartphone Application In Improving Oral Hygiene Compared To Oral Instructions In Patients With Plaque-induced Gingivitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial Histopathological Evaluation of Cholecalciferol Overdose on Tongue Structure of Albino Rats (Immunohistochemical Study) EFFECT OF EXTERNAL COLD AND VIBRATION (BUZZY DEVICE) VERSUS THE CONVENTIONAL INJECTION TECHNIQUE ON PAIN PERCEPTION DURING LOCAL ANESTHESIA ADMINSTRATION IN CHILDREN: A SPLIT-MOUTH RANDOMIZED CLINICALTRIAL STUDY Effect of Different In-Office Bleaching techniques on Enamel Color and Surface Roughness: In Vitro Study SURFACE ROUGHNESS AND COLOR STABILITY OF MILLED VERSUS 3D PRINTED INTERIM RESTORATION AFTER IMMERSION IN TWO PH MEDIA (IN VITRO STUDY)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1