The Toxicity of Universal Dental Adhesives: An In Vitro Study.

Adam Wawrzynkiewicz,Grzegorz Galita,Ireneusz Majsterek,Jerzy Sokolowski,Monika Lukomska-Szymanska,Wioletta Rozpedek-Kaminska,Barbara Lapinska

doi:10.3390/polym13162653

Adam Wawrzynkiewicz, Grzegorz Galita + Show 5 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13162653

Copy DOI

Journal: Polymers	Publication Date: Aug 10, 2021
Citations: 5	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Medical University of Lodz

Abstract

There is no consensus in the literature regarding the potential toxicity of universal dental adhesives (UDA). Being used in close proximity to the pulp, their biocompatibility should be an important factor in dental research. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the biocompatibility of UDA in an in vitro model. The study was performed using a monocyte/macrophage peripheral blood SC cell line (ATCC CRL-9855) on four specific UDA, namely: All-Bond Universal (Bisco); CLEARFIL Universal Bond Quick (Kuraray); G-Premio BOND (GC); Single Bond Universal (3M ESPE). The cytotoxicity of the investigated UDA was measured using the XTT colorimetric assay. The genotoxicity of the analyzed compounds was evaluated using an alkaline version of the comet assay. Furthermore, flow cytometry (FC) apoptosis detection was performed using the FITC Annexin V Apoptosis Detection Kit I. FC cell-cycle arrest assessment was performed using propidium iodide staining. The study observed significant differences in the toxicity of the UDA that were tested, as G-Premio BOND showed significant in vitro toxicity in all of the tests performed, while All-Bond Universal, CLEARFIL Universal Bond Quick and Single Bond Universal did not present any significant toxic effects toward SC cell line. The in vitro toxicity of UDA should be taken into consideration prior to in vivo and clinical studies. The flow cytometry could improve the accuracy of dental materials research and should be incorporated into the standardization criteria.

Highlights

Universal dental adhesives (UDA), despite not having a fixed definition in the literature, are commonly described as no-mix, single-bottle adhesives that can be utilized in etch-and-rinse, self-etch, and selective enamel etching bonding strategies [1,2,3,4]
The cell cycle analysis with flow cytometry (FC) showed a significant increase in the sub-G0/G1 phase in cells that were treated with the G-Premio BOND eluate, which indicates that there was a higher number of dead cells compared to the controls used and the other UDA tested
The results presented in this manuscript showed that the UDA that were investigated have different impacts on the SC cell line

Summary

Introduction

Universal dental adhesives (UDA), despite not having a fixed definition in the literature, are commonly described as no-mix, single-bottle adhesives that can be utilized in etch-and-rinse, self-etch, and selective enamel etching bonding strategies [1,2,3,4]. UDA are versatile and can be used in both direct and indirect bonding to enamel and dentin with different materials, such as composite resins, glass ceramics, zirconia and various metals [5,6,7]. They allow the silanization step to be eliminated due to the incorporation of silane in some of their compositions [8]. Glycero-phosphate dimethacrylate (GPDM), as well as polyalkenoic acid copolymer (PAC) These functional monomers enable the long term chemical bonding to dentin [10,11]

Objectives

Results

Discussion

Conclusion