Detection and quantification of monomers in unstimulated whole saliva after treatment with resin‐based composite fillings in vivo

Abstract

Resin-based dental restorative materials contain allergenic methacrylate monomers, which may be released into saliva after restorative treatment. Monomers from resin-based composite materials have been demonstrated in saliva in vitro; however, studies analyzing saliva after restorative therapy are scarce. The aim of this study was to quantify methacrylate monomers in saliva after treatment with a resin-based composite filling material. Saliva was collected from 10 patients at four start points--before treatment, and 10 min, 24 h, and 7 d after treatment--and analysed by combined chromatography/mass spectrometry. The monomers bisphenol-A diglycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA), 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA), and urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA) were detected and quantified in the samples collected shortly (10 min) after treatment. The amounts detected ranged from 0.028 to 9.65 μg ml(-1) for Bis-GMA, from 0.015 to 0.19 μg ml(-1) for HEMA, and from 0.004 to 1.2 μg ml(-1) for UDMA. Triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA) was detected in four of the samples. Ethoxylated bisphenol-A dimethacrylate (Bis-EMA) was not detected. Monomers were not detected in saliva samples collected before treatment, or 24 h or 7 d after treatment, with the exception of one sample, 24 h after treatment, in which HEMA was detected. In conclusion, monomers from the investigated resin-based composite and adhesive system were present in saliva shortly after treatment. One week after treatment, no monomers could be detected in patients' saliva samples.

Dental composite restorations and neuropsychological development in children: Treatment level analysis from a randomized clinical trial

“…Although numerous laboratory studies show release of resin monomers from dental materials (Van Landuyt et al, 2011), the extent to which they are released after restoration treatment in humans remains unclear. A recent saliva study in 10 adults found that treatment with a bisGMA-based filling led to increased bisGMA and other resin components in saliva shortly after treatment, but no detectable levels were found one week later (Michelsen et al, 2012). In a study of 20 children, urinary BPA levels increased after dental composite treatment and had not returned to baseline levels at the end of follow-up two weeks later (Martin et al, 2005).…”

BPA from dental resin material: where are we going with restorative and preventive dental biomaterials?

“…BPA became undetectable 1 and 24 h after the placement of the sealant [10,12]. It was concluded that due to the low level of BPA, there was no clinical risk after placement of fissure sealants, an assumption that was confirmed by other authors [10,13,14]. Indeed, considering the dose-response, the BPA level was too low to be toxic if the disease is linked to the amount of BPA released during dental treatment.…”

Effect of short LED lamp exposure on wear resistance, residual monomer and degree of conversion for Filtek Z250 and Tetric EvoCeram composites

“…However, the in vivo situation is not clear, some studies indicate initial short term exposure to monomers, either from short term leaching, or as contamination from the restorative treatment [26,28]. A low value of residual monomers in composite materials would minimize the risk of adverse reactions from dental monomers.…”

“…This indicates a greater potential for elution of monomers from TEC than for Z250. Previously, it has been reported larger amounts of residual monomer in the Tetric Ceram material, which was the precursor to TEC, than in Z250 [28].…”