Journal of dentistry · 2011
Cytotoxicity of 45S5 bioglass paste used for dentine hypersensitivity treatment.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Bakry Ahmed Samir, Tamura Yukihiko, Otsuki Masayuki, Kasugai Shohei, Ohya Keiichi, Tagami Junji
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: 45S5 bioglass mixed with 50% phosphoric acid has been suggested to treat dentine hypersensitivity and incipient enamel caries. This study is going to evaluate the biocompatibility of using the aforementioned technique with the rat pulpal cells.
METHODS: The relative cytotoxicity of 45S5 bioglass on rat dental pulp cells was compared to the cytotoxicity of a temporary filling material (Caviton; GC, Japan), Type 1 glass ionomer cement (Fuji I; GC, Tokyo, Japan) and commercial desensitising agent (SuperSeal; Phoenix Dental, Fenton, MI, USA) using a transwell insert model. Cell viability was measured by means of a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay. The number of viable cell counts were compared using one way ANOVA (p<0.05). The morphological alterations of the pulp cells were observed directly by phase contrast microscope.
RESULTS: The results of this study indicated that cell viability recorded by the 45S5 bioglass paste group did not differ significantly from those of the Caviton, glass ionomer or superseal, moreover pulpal cells microscopic analysis revealed that 45S5 bioglass elicited minimal toxic effect.
CONCLUSIONS: 45S5 bioglass paste can serve as a biocompatible material that can potentially be used safely on dentine.
METHODS: The relative cytotoxicity of 45S5 bioglass on rat dental pulp cells was compared to the cytotoxicity of a temporary filling material (Caviton; GC, Japan), Type 1 glass ionomer cement (Fuji I; GC, Tokyo, Japan) and commercial desensitising agent (SuperSeal; Phoenix Dental, Fenton, MI, USA) using a transwell insert model. Cell viability was measured by means of a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay. The number of viable cell counts were compared using one way ANOVA (p<0.05). The morphological alterations of the pulp cells were observed directly by phase contrast microscope.
RESULTS: The results of this study indicated that cell viability recorded by the 45S5 bioglass paste group did not differ significantly from those of the Caviton, glass ionomer or superseal, moreover pulpal cells microscopic analysis revealed that 45S5 bioglass elicited minimal toxic effect.
CONCLUSIONS: 45S5 bioglass paste can serve as a biocompatible material that can potentially be used safely on dentine.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AnimalsBiocompatible MaterialsCalcium SulfateCell CountCell LineCell SurvivalCeramicsColoring AgentsDental CementsDental PulpDentin Desensitizing AgentsGlassGlass Ionomer CementsHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationMaterials TestingOxalic AcidPhosphoric AcidsRatsRoot Canal Filling MaterialsTetrazolium SaltsThiazolesVinyl CompoundsZinc Oxide