Abstract
The aim of this work was to evaluate the effects of different times of extraction on the cytotoxicity of six representatives of different root canal sealer groups-Real Seal SE, AH Plus, GuttaFlow, Sealapex, Roth 801, and ThermaSeal Plus-with human gingival fibroblasts. The materials were prepared according to manufacturers' specifications, and were incubated in culture medium (DMEM) at 37ºC for 1, 7, 14, 21, and 28 days, with daily washing, to simulate periodontal ligament clearance. Human fibroblasts were exposed to the final extracts at 24 hours, and cell viability was determined by MTT assay, with exposure to unconditioned DMEM as a negative control. Statistical analysis comparing cytotoxicities at each exposure time was performed by ANOVA with Scheffé adjustment for multiple comparisons at a 95% confidence level. Results indicated that GuttaFlow was significantly less cytotoxic than all other sealers (p < 0.05) at 1 day of extraction. After 7 days of extraction, cell viability for GuttaFlow was significantly increased as compared with that of all groups except sealer AH Plus. At day 14, cytotoxicity of Sealapex was significantly higher than that of all other sealers (p < 0.05). At days 21 and 28, there were no significant differences in cytotoxicity among sealer groups. All materials presented some level of cytotoxicity to fibroblasts, while GuttaFlow was the least cytotoxic sealer tested. However, the cytotoxicity of all materials seemed to decrease similarly in a time-dependent manner.
Highlights
A wide range of root canal sealers is presently available, based on different chemical compositions such as epoxy resins, calcium hydroxides, polyvinylsiloxane-based materials, and zinc oxide-eugenol, presenting diverse physical properties, functionalities, and practical features.Zinc oxide-eugenol formulations have been among the most widely used sealers in the last 80 years.[1]
Thermaseal Plus is another example of an epoxyresin sealer, which has been demonstrated as presenting significantly less leakage than other sealer groups.[4]
At day 1, the number of viable cells exposed to GuttaFlow was significantly different from all other groups (p < 0.05)
Summary
A wide range of root canal sealers is presently available, based on different chemical compositions such as epoxy resins, calcium hydroxides, polyvinylsiloxane-based materials, and zinc oxide-eugenol, presenting diverse physical properties, functionalities, and practical features. Zinc oxide-eugenol formulations have been among the most widely used sealers in the last 80 years.[1] Representatives of this group, such as Roth 801, may include Bi and Ba salts for x-ray contrast and present some antibacterial activity, as well as better wettability of dentin and gutta-percha surfaces than other sealers.[2]. Scelza MZ, Coil J, Alves GG lymerization without formation of formaldehyde.[3] Thermaseal Plus is another example of an epoxyresin sealer, which has been demonstrated as presenting significantly less leakage than other sealer groups.[4] Other important resin-based materials are the thermoplastic synthetic urethane dimethacrylate-based root-filling materials such as RealSeal or Epiphany,[5] described as presenting increased resistance to fractures of root-filled teeth.[6]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
