Comparision of biocompatibility and cytotoxicity of two new root canal sealers

Gençoğlu, Nimet; Şener, Göksel; Omurtag, Gülden Zehra; Tozan, Ayfer; Uslu, Bahar; Arbak, Serap; Helvacıoḡlu, Dilek

doi:10.1016/j.acthis.2009.06.005

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, the current results agree with others that show biocompatibility of GuttaFlow original formulation (17,18). This outcome was expected since GuttaFlow 2 presents basically the same composition, and the modified silver microparticles present a smaller number of atoms in their surface compared to nanoparticles (11,12).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Although studies of cytotoxicity have indicated favorable biological potential of both GuttaFlow and GuttaFlow 2 (16), up to date, only the original formulation of GuttaFlow was investigated regarding tissue responses in animal models (17,18). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to analyze the connective tissue reactions of Wistar rats to a siliconebased sealer (GuttaFlow 2; Roeko, Coltene Whaledent, Langenau, Germany) compared with a zinc oxide-based sealer (EndoFill; Dentsply Industria e Comerico Ltda, Petropolis, Brazil) and an epoxy resin-based material (AH Plus; Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biological Tissue Response to a New Formulation of a Silicone Based Endodontic Sealer

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Satisfactory biological behavior is a necessary requirement for clinical application of endodontic materials. In this study, the connective tissue responses to silicone (GuttaFlow 2), epoxy resin (AH Plus) and zinc oxide and eugenol (Endofill) based sealers were compared. Twelve Wistar rats had polyethylene tubes (four per animal) containing one of the tested sealers and empty tubes (negative control) implanted in their subcutaneous tissue. The tubes were randomly placed 2 cm from the spine and at least 2 cm apart from one another. Tissue samples with implants were processed for histological analysis after 7 or 60 days (n=6 animals per period). Inflammatory cells, fibrous condensation and abscess were scored according to their intensity. Friedman, followed by Dunn's post hoc, was used to compare sealers. Differences between the two experimental periods were verified using Mann-Witney U test (p<0.05). At 7 days, most of the histological parameters showed no significant differences amongst groups. Endofill group scored higher than the others for giant cells (o<0.05) and promoted a greater number of samples presenting abscess formation. GuttaFlow 2 tended to show a less intense inflammatory infiltrate compared to the other materials. At 60 days, there were no significant differences between groups in most of the histological parameters evaluated. However, it was observed that Endofill scored higher for macrophages (p<0.05) compared to the control group, and GuttaFlow 2 tended to present lower scores than the others for neutrophils and abscess. GuttaFlow 2 showed proper biological behavior and should be considered adequate for clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological Tissue Response to a New Formulation of a Silicone Based Endodontic Sealer

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the study of Gencoglu et al (2010), the EndoREZ and GuttaFlow root canal sealers did not cause adverse effects in the liver and kidney after they were injected subcutaneously. This is inconsistent with the present observations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…To study the subcutaneous tissue response or systemic toxicity to endodontic material, the material needs to be injected with a calculated dose (Gencoglu et al 2010 andSilva-Herzog et al 2011) or to be administered using a Teflon tube. In the present study, a Teflon tube was used because it exposes the material to the surrounding tissues, prevents its spread and does not have an adverse effect on the surrounding tissues (Makkes et al 1977, de Morais et al 2006, Parirokh et al 2011.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biocompatibility of BioAggregate and mineral trioxide aggregate on the liver and kidney

Khalil

Eid

2013

Int Endodontic J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With both, materials based on either PI or PCL, a so-called sealer is necessary because they do not bind to the root canal wall (Gatewood 2007). However, whilst the core materials are relatively biocompatible (Sjogren et al 1995), sealers irritate tissue (Yesilsoy et al 1988, Gencoglu et al 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Composites made of flame‐sprayed bioactive glass 45S5 and polymers: bioactivity and immediate sealing properties

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM: To engineer systems using polyisoprene (PI) or polycaprolactone (PCL) and nanometric bioactive glass 45S5 (BG) that could create a hydroxyapatite interface and thus ultimately make the use of an endodontic sealer unnecessary. METHODOLOGY: Different composites using PI or PCL as matrix material were prepared with BG contents of up to 30 wt%. Unfilled PI and PCL, commercially available filled PI (Obtura gutta-percha) and PCL pellets (Resilon) served as control materials. Bioactivity (in vitro precipitate formation in simulated body fluid) was investigated using scanning electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction analysis. To test immediate sealing ability, simulated root canals were filled with heated materials, and dye leakage was assessed. Leakage was statistically compared between groups using Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance followed by Mann-Whitney U tests and Bonferroni correction. The alpha-type error was set at 0.05. RESULTS: Both composite systems revealed hydroxyapatite formation on their surface. This was not observed on control materials. Incorporating 30 wt% BG into PI and PCL significantly (P < 0.05) improved their immediate sealing ability compared to that of unfilled polymers, so that dye leakage in simulated root canals was prevented completely. CONCLUSION: Polyisoprene and PCL composites with BG showed promising results as single root canal filling materials. Incorporation of BG fillers into the polymers under investigation made the resulting composite materials bioactive and improved their immediate sealing ability. AbstractAim To engineer systems using polyisoprene (PI) or polycaprolactone (PCL) and nanometric bioactive glass 45S5 (BG) that could create a hydroxyapatite interface and thus ultimately make the use of an endodontic sealer unnecessary.Methodology Different composites using PI or PCL as matrix material were prepared with BG contents of up to 30 wt%. Unfilled PI and PCL, commercially available filled PI (Obtura gutta-percha) and PCL pellets (Resilon) served as control materials. Bioactivity (in vitro precipitate formation in simulated body fluid) was investigated using scanning electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction analysis. To test immediate sealing ability, simulated root canals were filled with heated materials and dye leakage was assessed.Leakage was statistically compared between groups using Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance followed by Mann-Whitney U tets and Bonferroni correction. The alpha-type error was set at 0.05.Results Both composite systems revealed hydroxyapatite formation on their surface. This was not observed on control materials. Incorporating 30 wt% BG into PI and PCL significantly (P < 0.05) improved their immediate sealing ability compared to that of unfilled polymers, so that dye leakage in simulated root canals was prevented completely.Conclusion PI and PCL composites with bioactive glass showed promising results as single root canal filling materials. Incorporation of bioactive glass fillers into the polymers under investigation made t...

show abstract

Comparision of biocompatibility and cytotoxicity of two new root canal sealers

Cited by 16 publications

References 24 publications

Biological Tissue Response to a New Formulation of a Silicone Based Endodontic Sealer

Biological Tissue Response to a New Formulation of a Silicone Based Endodontic Sealer

Biocompatibility of BioAggregate and mineral trioxide aggregate on the liver and kidney

Composites made of flame‐sprayed bioactive glass 45S5 and polymers: bioactivity and immediate sealing properties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About