Comparision of biocompatibility and cytotoxicity of two new root canal sealers

Neurotoxicity evaluation of three root canal sealers on cultured rat trigeminal ganglion neurons

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate the possible neurotoxic effects of 3 root canal sealers (RCSs) (AH Plus, GuttaFlow, iRoot SP) on cultured rat trigeminal ganglion (TG) neurons.

Material and Methods

Primary cultures of TG neurons were obtained from 1 to 2-day old rats. Freshly mixed RCSs were incubated in sterile phosphate buffered saline and cells were incubated with supernatants of the RCSs for different time intervals (1-, 3-, 6- and 24-h; 1 or 1/10 diluted) and viability/cytotoxicity was tested by counting the number of live cells. Pair of dishes with cells from the same culture incubated with only culture medium was considered as negative controls. Cell images were captured and acquired at x200 magnification using a microscope equipped with a camera using special image program. The viable cells were manually counted assigned from the images for each dose and incubation duration. Data was analysed by using 1-way analysis of variance with Tukey post hoc tests.

Results

There was no significant change in cell viability after short duration of incubation (1- and 3-h) with the supernatant of any of RCSs, except for undiluted-AH Plus at 3-h. When AH Plus was compared with other RCSs, for diluted supernatants, there was only significant difference between iRoot SP and AH Plus at 24-h (P<0.05). Whereas undiluted-AH Plus was significantly more cytotoxic for 3-, 6- and 24-h periods as compared to respective incubation periods of undiluted other groups (P<0.05). GuttaFlow groups had similar neurotoxic effect on cells for all test periods.

Conclusions

All tested RCSs exhibited a variable degree of neurotoxicity on these primary sensory neurons of orofacial tissues, depending on their chemical compositions. GuttaFlow and iRoot SP evoked a less toxic response to TG cells than AH Plus.

Key words:Neurotoxicity, trigeminal ganglia, cell culture, root canal sealer, AH Plus, GuttaFlow, iRoot SP.

Biological Tissue Response to a New Formulation of a Silicone Based Endodontic Sealer

Abstract Satisfactory biological behavior is a necessary requirement for clinical application of endodontic materials. In this study, the connective tissue responses to silicone (GuttaFlow 2), epoxy resin (AH Plus) and zinc oxide and eugenol (Endofill) based sealers were compared. Twelve Wistar rats had polyethylene tubes (four per animal) containing one of the tested sealers and empty tubes (negative control) implanted in their subcutaneous tissue. The tubes were randomly placed 2 cm from the spine and at least 2 cm apart from one another. Tissue samples with implants were processed for histological analysis after 7 or 60 days (n=6 animals per period). Inflammatory cells, fibrous condensation and abscess were scored according to their intensity. Friedman, followed by Dunn's post hoc, was used to compare sealers. Differences between the two experimental periods were verified using Mann-Witney U test (p<0.05). At 7 days, most of the histological parameters showed no significant differences amongst groups. Endofill group scored higher than the others for giant cells (o<0.05) and promoted a greater number of samples presenting abscess formation. GuttaFlow 2 tended to show a less intense inflammatory infiltrate compared to the other materials. At 60 days, there were no significant differences between groups in most of the histological parameters evaluated. However, it was observed that Endofill scored higher for macrophages (p<0.05) compared to the control group, and GuttaFlow 2 tended to present lower scores than the others for neutrophils and abscess. GuttaFlow 2 showed proper biological behavior and should be considered adequate for clinical practice.

Cytotoxicity and gelatinolytic activity of a new silicon-based endodontic sealer

PURPOSE

To compare the cytotoxicity, gelatinolytic activity, and protein levels (MMP-2 and MMP-9) produced by 3T3 fibroblasts cells after stimulation with GuttaFlow 2 and AH Plus.

METHODS

3T3 fibroblasts were incubated with elutes of GuttaFlow 2 and AH Plus for 24 h. The cytotoxicity of tested materials was determined using the MTT and the LDH assay. Supernatants of cell cultures incubated with sealers were collected to determine the levels of MMP-2 and MMP-9 gelatinolytic activity by gelatin zymography. Cell lysates were used to determine MMP-2 and MMP-9 protein levels by Western Blot. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey test (P&lt;0.05).

RESULTS

AH Plus showed significantly less cell viability (mitochondrial activity of cells) than GuttaFlow 2 (P&lt;0.01). Moreover, GuttaFlow 2 was noncytotoxic, showing no statistically significant difference in LDH leakage levels compared to the control group (P&gt;0.05). Specific characterization of MMPs demonstrated that GuttaFlow 2 seemed not to affect MMP-2 levels compared with the control group, while AH Plus had elevated gelatinolytic activity and protein levels of MMP-2 as confirmed by quantitative measurements. No detectable gelatinolytic activity or protein levels of MMP-9 (92 kDa) was observed in any tested group.

CONCLUSIONS

GuttaFlow 2 did not showed cytotoxic effects and did not induce MMP-2 or MMP-9 expression.

Biotoxicity of commonly used root canal sealers: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The main objective of a root canal sealer is to provide a fluid tight seal. The purpose of this systematic meta-analysis was to determine the relative toxicity of commonly used root canal sealers like zinc oxide eugenol, calcium hydroxide, and resin-based sealers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online search was conducted in peer-reviewed journals listed in PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCO, and IndMed databases between 2000 and 2012). Statistical analysis was carried out by using analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by post-hoc comparison by Bonferroni method. The comparison between toxicity at 24 h and between 3 and 7 days was done by using paired t-test for each sealer.

RESULTS

At 24 h, the relative biotoxicity of the three sealers reported was insignificant (P- value 0.29), but the difference in toxicity was found significant (P < 0.001) after 3 days.

CONCLUSION

Calcium hydroxide sealer and zinc oxide eugenol were found to be significantly biotoxic as compared to resin-based sealers after 3 days.

Cytotoxicity evaluation of Gutta Flow and Endo Sequence BC sealers

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the cytotoxicity of GuttaFlow and EndoSequence BC sealers and compared them with AH Plus and Tubli-Seal sealers.

STUDY DESIGN

Samples (0.5 mg) of freshly mixed or set BC, GuttaFlow, AH Plus, and Tubli-Seal sealers were eluted with 300, 600, and 1,000 μL cell culture medium for 24 and 72 hours. L929 cells were seeded into 96-well plates at 3 × 10(4) cells/well and cultured with 100 μL eluate from each eluate group. Cells cultured only with culture medium served as control. After 24 hours' incubation, the cytotoxicity was evaluated by MTT assay. Cell viability was calculated as the percentage of the control group, and the results were analyzed with a one-way analysis of variance.

RESULTS

For the freshly mixed sealer, cell viability in the AH Plus group was less than in all of the other 3 sealer groups. The Tubli-Seal sealer group had less cell viability than the EndoSequence BC and GuttaFlow sealer groups. For the set sealer, the Tubli-Seal and AH Plus groups had less cell viability than the EndoSequence BC and GuttaFlow sealer groups. There was no cell viability difference between the EndoSequence BC and GuttaFlow sealer groups in the either freshly mixed or set sealer group.

CONCLUSIONS

The GuttaFlow and EndoSequence BC sealers have lower cytotoxicity than the AH Plus and Tubli-Seal sealers.

Tissue reaction to sealing materials: different view at biocompatibility

The biodegradability of root canal sealers in areas other than the root canal system is crucial to the overall success rate of endodontic treatment. The aim of the present study was to investigate, the cell and tissue reaction to GuttaFlow and AHPlus, both in vitro and in vivo. For the in vitro experiments the materials were incubated with Human Periodontal Ligament Fibroblasts and cell proliferation and cytotoxicity analyses were performed. Additional fluorescence-microscope stainings were carried out in order to visualize cell growth and morphology. For assessment of the tissue reaction to the materials a subcutaneous implantation model in Wistar rats was employed and the inflammatory response to the materials was visualized by means of general and specific histology after 6 weeks. Human gingival fibroblasts proliferation seemed to be dependent upon dental material and cultivation time. After an incubation period of 96 hrs AHPlus proved to be significantly (p < 0.002) more cytotoxic than GuttaFlow, as only a small number of fibroblasts survived on AHPlus. In vivo, GuttaFlow was surrounded by a fibrous capsule and no degradation took place, while AHPlus induced a well-vascularized granulation tissue in which the material was phagocyted by macrophages. The results of this study demonstrate that a potential cytotoxic effect of a sealing material may beneficial in order to have antibacterial properties and induce self degradation when accidentally extruded over the apical foramen.

Biocompatibility of four root canal sealers: a histopathological evaluation in rat subcutaneous connective tissue

The aim of this study was to evaluate the subcutaneous biocompatibility of: Epiphany, AH Plus, Pulp Canal Sealer and Sealapex root canal sealers. Sixty rats were randomly assigned to 4 groups, according to the sealer. Polyethylene tubes containing the tested materials were inserted into the connective tissue. The implants were removed after 7, 15 and 30 days, and the tissue samples were processed, stained and examined by light microscopy. The descriptive analysis considered: thickness of the fibrous capsule, severity of the inflammatory reaction, and presence of giant cells. After 7 days, all sealers induced moderate to severe inflammatory reaction. After 15 days, Epiphany and AH Plus sealers showed a moderate inflammatory reaction, while Pulp Canal Sealer and Sealapex induced severe and mild inflammatory reactions, respectively. After 30 days, mild inflammatory reactions were observed for Epiphany, Sealapex and AH Plus. Sealapex induced the lowest inflammatory response at all evaluation periods, and only Pulp Canal Sealer did not show a decreased in the inflammatory reaction over time.