Cytotoxicity of two self-adhesive flowable composites on bovine dental pulp-derived cells

Year 2021, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 209 - 212, 28.03.2021

Firdevs Kahvecioğlu , Türkay Kölüş , Fatma Sağ Güngör , Hayriye Esra Ülker

https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.842367

Abstract

Aim: The use of self-adhesive composites in dental treatment relatively a new concept. The aim of this study was to in-vitro evaluation cytotoxicity of Vertise Flow and Nova Compo SF Flow self-adhesive flowable composites on bovine dental pulp-derived cells.
Material and method: Experimental test samples (2×5mm) of Vertise Flow and Nova Compo SF Flow were prepared. Bovine dental pulp-derived cells were incubated in MEM-Alpha (Gibco-Invitrogen). The material samples to be tested were stored in the culture medium for 24 hours and therefore obtained extracts were applied onto the cells. The cell viability was determined by MTT assay. One-way ANOVA and Tukey-HSD post hoc tests used for statistical analysis.
Results: The percentage of cell viability of Vertise Flow found as 81,55%, Nova Compo SF Flow found as 71,40%. There is statistically significant difference between the control group and the test groups in term of the percentages of cell viability (p<0,05).
Conclusion: Both Vertise Flow and Nova Compo SF Flow self-adhesive flowable composites showed toxic reactions on bovine pulp derived cells.

Keywords

self-adhesive flowable composite, cytotoxicity, cell culture, MTT, bDPCs

References

• 1. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, et al. Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: Current status and future challenges. Oper Dent 2003; 28:215.
• 2. Van Meerbeek B, Vargas M, Inoue S, Yoshida Y, Peumans M, Lambrechts P, et al. Adhesives and cements to promote preservation dentistry. Oper Dent 2001; 119–44.
• 3. Alex G. Is total-etch dead? Evidence suggests otherwise. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2012; 33: 12–4.
• 4. Ozer F, Blatz MB. Self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesive systems in clinical dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2013; 34: 12–4.
• 5. Poss SD. Utilization of a new self-adhering flowable composite resin. Dent Today 2010 29: 104.
• 6. Vichi A, Margvelashvili M, Goracci C, Papacchini F, Ferrari M. Bonding and sealing ability of a new self-adhering flowable composite resin in class I restorations. Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Jul; 17: 1497–506.
• 7. Williams DF. On the mechanisms of biocompatibility. Biomaterials 2008; 29: 2941–53.
• 8. Cardoso M V, de Almeida Neves A, Mine A, et al. Current aspects on bonding effectiveness and stability in adhesive dentistry. Aust Dent J 2011; 56: 31–44.
• 9. Silva e Souza Junior MH, Carneiro KGK, Lobato MF, Silva e Souza P de AR, Góes MF de. Adhesive systems: important aspects related to their composition and clinical use. J Appl Oral Sci 2010; 18: 207–14.
• 10. Küçükyılmaz E, Çelik EU, Savas S, Bölükbaşi B. Comparison of microleakage of self-adhesive flowable composites in class V cavities. Cumhur Dent J 2015 1; 18: 116–27.
• 11. Hanks CT, Wataha JC, Sun Z. In vitro models of biocompatibility: a review. Dent Mater 1996; 12: 186–93.
• 12. Shin H, Ko H, Kim M. Cytotoxicity and biocompatibility of Zirconia (Y-TZP) posts with various dental cements. Restor Dent Endod 2016; 41: 167–75.
• 13. Koohpeima F, Mokhtari MJ, Doozandeh M, Jowkar Z, Yazdanshenas F. Comparison of Cytotoxicity of New Nanohybrid Composite, Giomer, Glass Ionomer and Silver Reinforced Glass Ionomer using Human Gingival Fibroblast Cell Line. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2017; 41: 368–73.
• 14. Wataha JC. Principles of biocompatibility for dental practitioners. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 86: 203–9.
• 15. Schmalz G. Concepts in biocompatibility testing of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig 1998; 1: 154–62.
• 16. Bean TA, Zhuang WC, Tong PY, Eick JD, Chappelow CC, Yourtee DM. Comparison of tetrazolium colorimetric and 51Cr release assays for cytotoxicity determination of dental biomaterials. Dent Mater 1995; 11: 327–31.
• 17. Malkoc MA, Demir N, Şengün A, Bozkurt ŞB, Hakki SS. Cytotoxicity evaluation of luting resin cements on bovine dental pulp-derived cells (bDPCs) by real-time cell analysis. Dent Mater J 2015; 34: 154–60.
• 18. Vajrabhaya L, Korsuwannawong S, Bosl C, Schmalz G. The cytotoxicity of self-etching primer bonding agents in vitro. Oral Surgery, Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol 2009; 107: 86–90.
• 19. Noda M, Wataha JC, Kaga M, Lockwood PE, Volkmann KR, Sano H. Components of dentinal adhesives modulate heat shock protein 72 expression in heat-stressed THP-1 human monocytes at sublethal concentrations. J Dent Res 2002; 81: 265–9.
• 20. Michelsen VB, Moe G, Skålevik R, Jensen E, Lygre H. Quantification of organic eluates from polymerized resin-based dental restorative materials by use of GC/MS. J Chromatogr B 2007; 850: 83–91.
• 21. Hamid A, Hume WR. Diffusion of resin monomers through human carious dentin in vitro. Dent Traumatol 1997; 13: 1–5.
• 22. Pawlowska E, Poplawski T, Ksiazek D, Szczepanska J, Blasiak J. Genotoxicity and cytotoxicity of 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate. Mutat Res Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2010; 696: 122–9.
• 23. Ülker HE, Ülker M, Özcan E. Kendinden bağlanabilen yeni bir akışkan kompozitin sitotoksisitesinin dentin bariyer testi ile değerlendirilmesi. Acta Odontol Turc 2013; 30: 140–4.