MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.11.028

Медицинская библиотека · Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics · 2010

Cytotoxicity evaluation of endosequence root repair material.

Alanezi Amer Z, Jiang Jin, Safavi Kamran E, Spangberg Larz S W, Zhu Qiang

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cytotoxicity of EndoSequence Root Repair Material (Brasseler USA, Savannah, GA) and compare it with gray and white MTA.

STUDY

DESIGN

Samples of 2 mg freshly mixed or set gray MTA (GMTA), white MTA (WMTA), EndoSequence Root Repair Material (ERRM), and AH26 were eluted with 300, 600, and 1,000 microL cell culture medium for 24 and 72 hours. L929 cells were seeded into 96-well plates at 3 x 10(4) cells/well and incubated with 100 microL elute from each elute group. Cells cultured only with culture medium served as negative control. AH26 was used as positive control. After 24 hours' incubation, cell cytotoxicity was evaluated by MTT assay. Cell viability was calculated as percentage of the control group. The results were analyzed with 1-way analysis of variance.

RESULTS

For both set and fresh samples, there were no significant cell viability differences among GMTA, WMTA, and ERRM. Cell viability in the AH26 group was less than in all of the other 3 materials.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that ERRM may have cell viability similar to GMTA and WMTA in both set and fresh conditions.

Для цитирования: Alanezi Amer Z, Jiang Jin, Safavi Kamran E, Spangberg Larz S W, Zhu Qiang. Cytotoxicity evaluation of endosequence root repair material.. Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics. 2010. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.11.028.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.