Sergio López-García, Miguel Ramón Pecci-Lloret, María Pilar Pecci-Lloret, David García-Bernal, Ricardo Elías Oñate-Sánchez
{"title":"后处理程序对生物相容性 3D 打印树脂的影响。","authors":"Sergio López-García, Miguel Ramón Pecci-Lloret, María Pilar Pecci-Lloret, David García-Bernal, Ricardo Elías Oñate-Sánchez","doi":"10.1111/jopr.13980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the cytotoxicity of a biocompatible 3D-printed resin material for occlusal devices after post-processing with two different high-intensity UV-polymerization devices and two rinsing solvents, in the presence of human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Sample discs from the 3D-printed resin material were printed (2 mm in height and 6 mm in diameter [N = 40]) and divided into 4 groups (n = 10) based on post-processing methods: a high-intensity UV polymerization device with isopropyl alcohol, a high-intensity UV polymerization device with a modified glycol solvent, a UV cleaning and curing unit with isopropyl alcohol, a UV cleaning and curing unit with a modified glycol solvent, and a control group cultured in DMEM medium. Different tests were performed to evaluate their cytocompatibility on HGFs: MTT assay, cell migration assay, cell cytoskeleton staining, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and cell apoptosis and generation of intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS). Statistical analyses were performed using one-way ANOVA and the Tukey post hoc test (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cytocompatibility, MTT assay, cell migration assay, cell cytoskeleton staining, and SEM images were similar, regardless of the post-processing protocol, compared with the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No differences were found in the cytotoxicity of the 3D-printed resin material for occlusal devices after the following post-processing methods: two different UV-polymerization devices and two rinsing solvents (isopropyl alcohol and a modified glycol solvent).</p>","PeriodicalId":49152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of the post-processing protocol on a biocompatible 3D-printed resin.\",\"authors\":\"Sergio López-García, Miguel Ramón Pecci-Lloret, María Pilar Pecci-Lloret, David García-Bernal, Ricardo Elías Oñate-Sánchez\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jopr.13980\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the cytotoxicity of a biocompatible 3D-printed resin material for occlusal devices after post-processing with two different high-intensity UV-polymerization devices and two rinsing solvents, in the presence of human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Sample discs from the 3D-printed resin material were printed (2 mm in height and 6 mm in diameter [N = 40]) and divided into 4 groups (n = 10) based on post-processing methods: a high-intensity UV polymerization device with isopropyl alcohol, a high-intensity UV polymerization device with a modified glycol solvent, a UV cleaning and curing unit with isopropyl alcohol, a UV cleaning and curing unit with a modified glycol solvent, and a control group cultured in DMEM medium. Different tests were performed to evaluate their cytocompatibility on HGFs: MTT assay, cell migration assay, cell cytoskeleton staining, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and cell apoptosis and generation of intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS). Statistical analyses were performed using one-way ANOVA and the Tukey post hoc test (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cytocompatibility, MTT assay, cell migration assay, cell cytoskeleton staining, and SEM images were similar, regardless of the post-processing protocol, compared with the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No differences were found in the cytotoxicity of the 3D-printed resin material for occlusal devices after the following post-processing methods: two different UV-polymerization devices and two rinsing solvents (isopropyl alcohol and a modified glycol solvent).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13980\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13980","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Influence of the post-processing protocol on a biocompatible 3D-printed resin.
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the cytotoxicity of a biocompatible 3D-printed resin material for occlusal devices after post-processing with two different high-intensity UV-polymerization devices and two rinsing solvents, in the presence of human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs).
Material and methods: Sample discs from the 3D-printed resin material were printed (2 mm in height and 6 mm in diameter [N = 40]) and divided into 4 groups (n = 10) based on post-processing methods: a high-intensity UV polymerization device with isopropyl alcohol, a high-intensity UV polymerization device with a modified glycol solvent, a UV cleaning and curing unit with isopropyl alcohol, a UV cleaning and curing unit with a modified glycol solvent, and a control group cultured in DMEM medium. Different tests were performed to evaluate their cytocompatibility on HGFs: MTT assay, cell migration assay, cell cytoskeleton staining, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and cell apoptosis and generation of intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS). Statistical analyses were performed using one-way ANOVA and the Tukey post hoc test (α = 0.05).
Results: Cytocompatibility, MTT assay, cell migration assay, cell cytoskeleton staining, and SEM images were similar, regardless of the post-processing protocol, compared with the control group.
Conclusions: No differences were found in the cytotoxicity of the 3D-printed resin material for occlusal devices after the following post-processing methods: two different UV-polymerization devices and two rinsing solvents (isopropyl alcohol and a modified glycol solvent).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Prosthodontics promotes the advanced study and practice of prosthodontics, implant, esthetic, and reconstructive dentistry. It is the official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, the American Dental Association-recognized voice of the Specialty of Prosthodontics. The journal publishes evidence-based original scientific articles presenting information that is relevant and useful to prosthodontists. Additionally, it publishes reports of innovative techniques, new instructional methodologies, and instructive clinical reports with an interdisciplinary flair. The journal is particularly focused on promoting the study and use of cutting-edge technology and positioning prosthodontists as the early-adopters of new technology in the dental community.