Application of Texture and Fractal Dimension Analysis to Evaluate Subgingival Cement Surfaces in Terms of Biocompatibility.

Katarzyna Skośkiewicz-Malinowska,Agnieszka Rusak,Kamil Jurczyszyn,Marcin Kozakiewicz,Piotr Kuropka,Martyna Mysior

doi:10.3390/ma14195857

Abstract

Biocompatibility is defined as “the ability of a biomaterial, prosthesis, or medical device to perform with an appropriate host response in a specific application”. Biocompatibility is especially important for restorative dentists as they use materials that remain in close contact with living tissues for a long time. The research material involves six types of cement used frequently in the subgingival region: Ketac Fil Plus (3M ESPE, Germany), Riva Self Cure (SDI, Australia) (Glass Ionomer Cements), Breeze (Pentron Clinical, USA) (Resin-based Cement), Adhesor Carbofine (Pentron, Czech Republic), Harvard Polycarboxylat Cement (Harvard Dental, Great Britain) (Zinc polycarboxylate types of cement) and Agatos S (Chema-Elektromet, Poland) (Zinc Phosphate Cement). Texture and fractal dimension analysis was applied. An evaluation of cytotoxicity and cell adhesion was carried out. The fractal dimension of Breeze (Pentron Clinical, USA) differed in each of the tested types of cement. Adhesor Carbofine (Pentron, Czech Republic) cytotoxicity was rated 4 on a 0–4 scale. The Ketac Fil Plus (3M ESPE, Germany) and Riva Self Cure (SDI, Australia) cements showed the most favorable conditions for the adhesion of fibroblasts, despite statistically significant differences in the fractal dimension of their surfaces.

Highlights

Biocompatibility is defined as “the ability of a biomaterial, prosthesis, or medical device to perform with an appropriate host response in a specific application” [1]
Biocompatibility is especially important for restorative dentists as they use materials that remain in close contact with living tissues for a long time [2]
It is especially relevant when they occur in the subgingival area because of their potentially negative impact on biofilm accumulation, direct irritation of the gingiva, and damage to the biological width [5]

Summary

Introduction

Biocompatibility is defined as “the ability of a biomaterial, prosthesis, or medical device to perform with an appropriate host response in a specific application” [1]. One of these is in vitro research, followed by investigations conducted on animals and, clinical studies This makes it possible to evaluate the biocompatibility of new materials and eliminate those with more significant cytotoxic potential [3]. Adverse biological reactions to materials used in dentistry are often unnoticed by patients or dentists [4] It is especially relevant when they occur in the subgingival area because of their potentially negative impact on biofilm accumulation, direct irritation of the gingiva, and damage to the biological width [5]. It is a significant challenge for the restorative material to incorporate the hard tissue of the tooth and the soft tissue of the gingiva [6]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion