Title
Author
DOI
Article Type
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Article Menu
Export Article
More by Authors Links
Article Data
- Views 592
- Dowloads 156
Original Research
Open AccessCytotoxicity of Fast-set Conventional and Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement Polymerized at Different Times on SHED
Cytotoxicity of Fast-set Conventional and Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement Polymerized at Different Times on SHED
1Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 16150, Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia
*Corresponding Author(s): Norhayati Luddin E-mail: norhayatiluddin@gmail.com
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the cytotoxicity of conventional GIC and Resin Modified GIC (RMGIC) polymerized at 2 different times on stem cells from human exfoliated deciduous teeth (SHED). Study design: The conventional GIC (Fuji IX GP Extra) and RMGIC (Fuji II LC) were mixed and incubated in a prepared Dublecco’s Modified Eagle Medium (DMEM) for seven days. After seeding the characterized SHED for 24 hrs, six replicates of seven serially diluted extracts of each group were added and incubated for 72 hrs. MTT test was used for cytotoxicity evaluation and the data were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis followed by Mann-Whitney test, with the statistical significance set at P<0.05. Results: The half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) was found at 45.0 mg/ml, 45.0 mg/ml and 31.25 mg/ml for Fuji IX, Fuji II LC (40s) and Fuji II LC (20s), respectively. Significantly different cytotoxic effects were found between Fuji II LC polymerized at 20 secs and 40 secs, and between Fuji IX and Fuji II LC (20s) (P<0.05), and these were observed in all concentrations except for 50 mg/ml. Conclusions:RMGIC polymerized at 20 secs exhibited the least favorable cell viability among all groups. Nevertheless, the cell viability was comparable to conventional GICs when the manufacturer’s recommended time was doubled (40 secs).
Keywords
Glass ionomer cement, resin modified glass ionomer cement, polymerization time, cytotoxicity, SHED
Cite and Share
Roszeyana Mohd Zainal Abidin,Norhayati Luddin,Nor Shamsuria Omar,Hany Mohamed Aly Ahmed. Cytotoxicity of Fast-set Conventional and Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement Polymerized at Different Times on SHED. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2015. 39(3);235-240.
References
1. Mount GJ. A colour atlas of glass ionomer cement, 2nd ed. Martin Dunitz, 1994.
2. Gao W, Smales RJ. Fluoride release/ uptake of conventional and resin-modified glass ionomer cement and compomer. J Dent 29: 301-6, 2001.
3. Xie D, Brantley BM, Culbertson G, Wang G. Mechanical properties and microstructures of glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater 16: 129-38, 2000.
4. Erickson RL, Glasspoole EA. Bonding to tooth structure: a comparison of glass-ionomer and composite-resin systems. J Esthet Dent 6: 227-44, 1994.
5. Souza Costa CA, Hebling J, Garcia-Godoy F, Hanks CT. In vitro cytotoxicity of five glass-ionomer cements. Biomaterials 24: 3853-8, 2003.
6. Ahmed HMA, Omar NS, Luddin N, Saini R, Saini D. Cytotoxicity evaluation of a new fast set highly viscous conventional glass ionomer cement with L929 fibroblast cell line. J Conserv Dent 14: 406-8, 2011.
7. Ahmed HMA, Al Rayes MHI, Saini D. Management and prognosis of teeth with trauma induced crown fractures and large periapical cyst like lesions following apical surgery with and without retrograde filling. J Conserv Dent 15: 77-9, 2012.
8. Sidhu SK, Watson TF. Resin-modified glass ionomer materials. A status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent 8: 59-67, 1995.
9. Sasanaluckit P, Albustany KR, Doherty PJ, Williams DF. Biocompatibility of glass ionomer cements. Biomaterials 14: 906-16, 1993.
10. Stanislawski, L., Daniau, X., Lauti, A. and Goldberg, M. Factors responsible for pulp cell cytotoxicity in-duced by resin-modified glass ionomer cements. J Biomed Mater Res 48: 277-88, 1999.
11. Wilson AD. Resin-modified glass ionomer cements. Int J Prosthodont 3: 425-9, 1990.
12. McCabe JF. Resin-modified glass-ionomers. Biomaterials 19: 521–7, 1998.
13. Huang F, Chang Y. Cytotoxicity of resin based restorative materials on human pulp cell cultures. Oral Surg Oral med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 94: 361-5, 2002.
14. Bouillaguet S., Wataha JC., Hanks CT., Ciucchi B. and Holz J. In vitro cytotoxicity and dentin permeability of HEMA. J Endod 22: 244–8, 1996.
15. Geurtsen W, Spahl W, Leyhausen G. Residual monomer/additive release and variability in cytotoxicity of light curing glass ionomer cements and compomers. J Dent Res 77: 2012-9, 1998.
16. Souza PPC, Aranha AMF, Hebling J, Giro EMA, Costa CA. In vitro cytotoxicity and in vivo biocompatibility of contemporary resin-modified glass ionomer cements. Dent Mater 22: 838-44, 2006.
17. Nicholson JW, Czarnecka B. The biocompatibility of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements for dentistry. Dent Mater 24: 1702-8, 2008.
18. Aranha AMF, Giro EMA, Souza PPC, Hebling J, Lessa FCR, Costa CA. Effect of light- curing time on the cytotoxicity of restorative composite resin on odontoblast-like cells. J Appli Oral Sci 18: 461-6, 2010.
19. Sigush BW, Plaufm T, Volpel A, Uhl A, Gretsch K, Hoy S et al. Resin-composite cytotoxicity varies with shade and irradiance. Dent Mater 28: 312-9, 2012.
20. Lutfi AN, Kannan TP, Fazliah MN, Jamaruddin MA, Saidi J. Proliferative activity of cells from remaining dental pulp in response to treatment with dental materials. Aust Dent J 55: 79–85, 2010.
21. Sun J, Weng Y, Song F, Xie D. In vitro responses of human pulp cells and 3T3 mouse fibroblasts to six contemporary dental restoratives. J Biomed Sci Engineer 4: 18-28, 2011.
22. Bryan TE, Khechen K, Brackett MG et al. In vitro osteogenic potential of an experimental calcium silicate based root canal sealer. J Endod 36: 1163–9, 2010.
23. Croll TP, Nicholson JW. Glass ionomer cements in pediatric dentistry: review of the literature. Pediatr Dent 24: 423-9, 2002.
24. Qvist V, Poulsen A, Teglers PT, Mjör IA. The longevity of different restorations in primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 20: 1-7, 2010.
25. Miura M, Gronthos S, Zhao M, et al. SHED: stem cells from human exfoliated deciduous teeth. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 100: 5807-12, 2003.
26. Wataha JC, Hanks CT, Sun Z. Effect of cell line on in vitro metal ion cytotoxicity. Dent Mater 10: 156, 1994.
27. Oliva A, Della Ragioe F, Salerno A et al. Biocompatibility studies on glass ionomer cements by primary cultures of human osteoblasts Biomaterials 17: 1352–6, 1996.
28. Leyhausen G., Abtahi M., Karbakhsch M., Sapotnick A., Geurtsen W. Biocompatibility of various light-curing and one conventional glass-ionomer cement. Biomaterials 19: 559-64, 1998.
29. Palmer G, Anstice HM, Pearson GJ. The effect of curing regime on the release of hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA from resin-modified glass ionomer cements. J Dent 27: 303-11, 1999.
30. Chang HH, Guo MK, Kasten FH, et al. Stimulation of glutathione depletion ROS production and cell cycle arrest of dental pulp cells and gingival epithelial cells by HEMA. Biomaterials 26: 745–53, 2005.
31. Bakopoulou, A., G. Leyhausen, Volk J, et al. Effects of HEMA and TEDGMA on the in vitro odontogenic differentiation potential of human pulp stem/progenitor cells derived from deciduous teeth. Dent Mater 27: 608-17, 2011.
32. Aranha AMF, Giro EMA, Souza PPC, Hebling J, de Souza Costa CA. Effect of curing regime on the cytotoxicity of resin-modified glass-ionomer lining cements applied to an odontoblast-cell line. Dent Mater 22: 864-9, 2006.
Abstracted / indexed in
Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) Created as SCI in 1964, Science Citation Index Expanded now indexes over 9,500 of the world’s most impactful journals across 178 scientific disciplines. More than 53 million records and 1.18 billion cited references date back from 1900 to present.
Biological Abstracts Easily discover critical journal coverage of the life sciences with Biological Abstracts, produced by the Web of Science Group, with topics ranging from botany to microbiology to pharmacology. Including BIOSIS indexing and MeSH terms, specialized indexing in Biological Abstracts helps you to discover more accurate, context-sensitive results.
Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.
JournalSeek Genamics JournalSeek is the largest completely categorized database of freely available journal information available on the internet. The database presently contains 39226 titles. Journal information includes the description (aims and scope), journal abbreviation, journal homepage link, subject category and ISSN.
Current Contents - Clinical Medicine Current Contents - Clinical Medicine provides easy access to complete tables of contents, abstracts, bibliographic information and all other significant items in recently published issues from over 1,000 leading journals in clinical medicine.
BIOSIS Previews BIOSIS Previews is an English-language, bibliographic database service, with abstracts and citation indexing. It is part of Clarivate Analytics Web of Science suite. BIOSIS Previews indexes data from 1926 to the present.
Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition aims to evaluate a journal’s value from multiple perspectives including the journal impact factor, descriptive data about a journal’s open access content as well as contributing authors, and provide readers a transparent and publisher-neutral data & statistics information about the journal.
Scopus: CiteScore 2.0 (2022) Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 Inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences.
Submission Turnaround Time
Conferences
Top