Limits...
In vitro comparison of cytotoxicity of four root canal sealers on human gingival fibroblasts.

Konjhodzic-Prcic A, Jakupovic S, Hasic-Brankovic L, Vukovic A - Med Arch (2015)

Bottom Line: Kolgomorov-Smirnov test, Shapiro-Wilk and descriptive statistics also were used, as well as Kriskall-Wallis, ANOVA test and T- test.According to our results all four sealers showed different cytotoxicity effects on human gingival fibroblast cell culture, but all of them are slightly cytotoxic.According to results of this study it can be concluded: all four sealers showed different cytotoxicity effects on primary cell lines of human gingival fibroblasts, but all of them are slightly cytotoxicity.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Hercegovina.

ABSTRACT

Unlabelled: The goal of this in vitro study was to evaluate the relative biocompatibility of four endodontic sealers on the cell culture of the human fibroblast through cytotoxicity.

Materials and methods: In this study four endodontics sealers was used GuttaFlow (Roeko)silicone based sealer, AH plus (De Tray-DENTSPLY) epoxy resin based, Apexit (Vivadent) calcium hydroxide based and Endorez (Ultradent) methacrylate based sealer. Sealers were tested on primary cell lines of human gingival fibroblasts. Experiments were preformed in laboratories of Hacettepe University of Ankara, Turkey and Faculty of Dentistry, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina Cytotoxicity was determinate using WST-1 assay.

Results: Results were analyzed by SPSS 19 program. Kolgomorov-Smirnov test, Shapiro-Wilk and descriptive statistics also were used, as well as Kriskall-Wallis, ANOVA test and T- test. According to our results all four sealers showed different cytotoxicity effects on human gingival fibroblast cell culture, but all of them are slightly cytotoxic.

Conclusions: According to results of this study it can be concluded: all four sealers showed different cytotoxicity effects on primary cell lines of human gingival fibroblasts, but all of them are slightly cytotoxicity.

No MeSH data available.


Cytotoxicity of sealers expressed in precents through time
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4384855&req=5

Figure 5: Cytotoxicity of sealers expressed in precents through time

Mentions: Tables 3 and 4 show a descriptive statistics of total human fibroblasts expressed in percents. The percents of surviving cells are calculated by the formula of group control/control x 100. The middle value for Apexit is 96.7%±17.8, AH 93.6%±24,1, Gutta flow 95.5%±24.1, Endorez 80.8%±16.2. X2 test proves that there is a statistically significant difference between groups for p<0.05, for Gutta flow, Endorez and Apexit, while for AH there is no statistically significant difference. The value of X2 test for Apexit is 13.6, for AH 4.43, for Gutta Flow 9.698, and for Endorez 28.2. The aforementioned results for surviving cells are given on graph 2, while the true cytotoxicity of tested sealers in given on graph 3.


In vitro comparison of cytotoxicity of four root canal sealers on human gingival fibroblasts.

Konjhodzic-Prcic A, Jakupovic S, Hasic-Brankovic L, Vukovic A - Med Arch (2015)

Cytotoxicity of sealers expressed in precents through time
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4384855&req=5

Figure 5: Cytotoxicity of sealers expressed in precents through time
Mentions: Tables 3 and 4 show a descriptive statistics of total human fibroblasts expressed in percents. The percents of surviving cells are calculated by the formula of group control/control x 100. The middle value for Apexit is 96.7%±17.8, AH 93.6%±24,1, Gutta flow 95.5%±24.1, Endorez 80.8%±16.2. X2 test proves that there is a statistically significant difference between groups for p<0.05, for Gutta flow, Endorez and Apexit, while for AH there is no statistically significant difference. The value of X2 test for Apexit is 13.6, for AH 4.43, for Gutta Flow 9.698, and for Endorez 28.2. The aforementioned results for surviving cells are given on graph 2, while the true cytotoxicity of tested sealers in given on graph 3.

Bottom Line: Kolgomorov-Smirnov test, Shapiro-Wilk and descriptive statistics also were used, as well as Kriskall-Wallis, ANOVA test and T- test.According to our results all four sealers showed different cytotoxicity effects on human gingival fibroblast cell culture, but all of them are slightly cytotoxic.According to results of this study it can be concluded: all four sealers showed different cytotoxicity effects on primary cell lines of human gingival fibroblasts, but all of them are slightly cytotoxicity.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Hercegovina.

ABSTRACT

Unlabelled: The goal of this in vitro study was to evaluate the relative biocompatibility of four endodontic sealers on the cell culture of the human fibroblast through cytotoxicity.

Materials and methods: In this study four endodontics sealers was used GuttaFlow (Roeko)silicone based sealer, AH plus (De Tray-DENTSPLY) epoxy resin based, Apexit (Vivadent) calcium hydroxide based and Endorez (Ultradent) methacrylate based sealer. Sealers were tested on primary cell lines of human gingival fibroblasts. Experiments were preformed in laboratories of Hacettepe University of Ankara, Turkey and Faculty of Dentistry, University of Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina Cytotoxicity was determinate using WST-1 assay.

Results: Results were analyzed by SPSS 19 program. Kolgomorov-Smirnov test, Shapiro-Wilk and descriptive statistics also were used, as well as Kriskall-Wallis, ANOVA test and T- test. According to our results all four sealers showed different cytotoxicity effects on human gingival fibroblast cell culture, but all of them are slightly cytotoxic.

Conclusions: According to results of this study it can be concluded: all four sealers showed different cytotoxicity effects on primary cell lines of human gingival fibroblasts, but all of them are slightly cytotoxicity.

No MeSH data available.