In Vitro Effect of Putty Calcium Silicate Materials on Human Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells

Rodríguez‐Lozano, Francisco Javier; López‐García, Sergio; García‐Bernal, David; Pecci‐Lloret, Miguel R.; Guerrero‐Gironés, Julia; Pecci-Lloret, María Pilar; Lozano, Adrián; Llena, Carmen; Spagnuolo, Gianrico; Forner, Leopoldo

doi:10.3390/app10010325

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, an ideal perforation repair material is still challenging. The efficacy of a material used for perforation repair depends primarily on its sealability and biocompatibility [ 4 , 7 , 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® (Avlon BioMed Inc., Bradenton, Fl) as a furcal perforation repair material is not fully understood. This study compares the biocompatibility of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA Angelus) and NeoMTA Plus® as delayed furcation perforation repair materials. Methods Pulpotomy and root canal obturation were performed in 72 premolars in six mongrel dogs and then a standardized furcal perforation was performed. The coronal access was left open for three weeks. After curetting, cleaning and drying of the perforations, these teeth were divided into three equal groups (N = 24 teeth/ 2 dogs each) according to the material used for perforation repair; group I: NeoMTA Plus®, group II: MTA Angelus and group III: no material (positive control). The coronal access cavities were sealed with a filling material. The inflammatory cell count and qualitative pathology (presence of calcific bridge, configuration of fibrous tissue formed, examination of tissue surrounding the furcation area, histology of intraradicular bone and the inflammatory nature of tissues) were carried out after one week (subgroup A, N = 8 teeth), one month (subgroup B, N = 8 teeth) and three months (subgroup C, N = 8 teeth). The inflammatory cell count was expressed as mean ± SD and statistically analyzed. P-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Results In all subgroups, the control group exhibited the highest number of inflammatory cell count, followed by MTA Angelus group and the least inflammatory cell count was shown by NeoMTA Plus® group. There was a significant difference in the inflammatory cell count between the NeoMTA Plus® and MTA Angelus after one week (P < 0.05) while no significant differences were recorded between them after one month and three months (P > 0.05). In contrast to group II, there was no significant differences in inflammatory cell count between the subgroups in groups I and III (P > 0.05). NeoMTA Plus® exhibited better qualitative pathological features than MTA Angelus after one week and nearly similar features after one month and three months of repair. Conclusion NeoMTA Plus® has a better early biocompatibility than MTA Angelus after one week of delayed furcation perforation repair and a similar late biocompatibility after one month and three months.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies assessing BioC R, TF BCR and IR FS reported an adequate cytocompatibility of the tested materials, exhibiting similar results to a negative control group (Abuarqoub et al, 2020;Rodríguez-Lozano et al, 2020a). All of the aforementioned cements showed a high cell adhesion and morphology (Abuarqoub et al, 2020;Luo et al, 2018;Rodríguez-Lozano et al, 2020a). Additionally, BD, BioC R, TF BCR and IR FS-treated hPDLSCs exhibited an upregulation of one or more cementogenic, osteogenic and/or odontogenic markers (Abuarqoub et al, 2020 BCR also showed a significantly higher mineralization potential compared to a negative control (Rodríguez-Lozano et al, 2020a).…”

Section: Study Resultsmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Amongst the 9 CSCs evaluated, BD was the only cement which exhibited significant positive results in cell viability and migration assays when compared to a negative control group (unconditioned culture medium; Abuarqoub et al, 2020). Studies assessing BioC R, TF BCR and IR FS reported an adequate cytocompatibility of the tested materials, exhibiting similar results to a negative control group (Abuarqoub et al, 2020;Rodríguez-Lozano et al, 2020a). All of the aforementioned cements showed a high cell adhesion and morphology (Abuarqoub et al, 2020;Luo et al, 2018;Rodríguez-Lozano et al, 2020a).…”

Section: Study Resultsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…All of the aforementioned cements showed a high cell adhesion and morphology (Abuarqoub et al, 2020;Luo et al, 2018;Rodríguez-Lozano et al, 2020a). Additionally, BD, BioC R, TF BCR and IR FS-treated hPDLSCs exhibited an upregulation of one or more cementogenic, osteogenic and/or odontogenic markers (Abuarqoub et al, 2020 BCR also showed a significantly higher mineralization potential compared to a negative control (Rodríguez-Lozano et al, 2020a). The remaining CSCs assessed were tested together with hPDLSCs both in neutral (pH 7.4) and acidic (pH 5.2) conditions.…”

Section: Study Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biological interactions between calcium silicate‐based endodontic biomaterials and periodontal ligament stem cells: A systematic review of in vitro studies

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Most recently, the biological interactions, that is cytocompatibility, cell differentiation and mineralization potential, between calcium silicate-based biomaterials and periodontal ligament stem cells (PDLSCs) have been studied at an in vitro level, in order to predict their clinical behaviour during endodontic procedures involving direct contact with periodontal tissues, namely root canal treatment, endodontic surgery and regenerative endodontic treatment. Objective:The aim of the present systematic review was to present a qualitative synthesis of available in vitro studies assessing the biological interaction of PDLSCs and calcium silicate-based biomaterials.Methodology: The present review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. An advanced database search was performed in Medline, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science and SciELO on 1 July 2020 and last updated on 22 April 2021. Studies assessing the biological interactions of PDLSCs with calcium silicate-based sealers (CSSs) and/or cements (CSCs) at an in vitro level were considered for inclusion. The evaluation of the 'biological interaction' was defined as any assay or test on the cytotoxicity, cytocompatibility, cell plasticity or differentiation potential, and bioactive properties of PDLSCs cultured in CSC or CSS-conditioned media. Quality (risk of bias) was assessed using a modified CONSORT checklist for in vitro studies of dental materials.Results: A total of 20 studies were included for the qualitative synthesis. CSCs and CSSs, as a group of endodontic materials, exhibit adequate cytocompatibility and favour the osteo/cementogenic differentiation and mineralization potential of PDLSCs, as evidenced from the in vitro studies included in the present systematic review. Discussion:The influence of the compositional differences, inclusion of additives, sample preparation, and varying conditions and manipulations on the biological properties of calcium silicate-based materials remain a subject for future research. Conclusions: Within the limitations of the in vitro nature of the included studies, this work supports the potential use of calcium silicate-based endodontic materials in stem cell therapy and biologically based regenerative endodontic procedures.

show abstract

“…62,63 Moreover, the material is versatile, guaranteeing different uses, and having excellent characteristics in being in contact with the materials for reconstruction. [64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mineral Trioxide Aggregate Applications in Endodontics: A Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A current topic in dentistry concerns the biocompatibility of the materials, and in particular, conservative dentistry and endodontics ones. The mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) is a dental material with biocompatibility properties to oral and dental tissues. MTA was developed for dental root repair in endodontic treatment and it is formulated from commercial Portland cement, combined with bismuth oxide powder for radiopacity. MTA is used for creating apical plugs during apexification, repairing root perforations during root canal therapy, treating internal root resorption, and pulp capping. The objective of this article is to investigate MTA features from a clinical point of view, even compared with other biomaterials. All the clinical data regarding this dental material will be evaluated in this review article. Data obtained from the analysis of the past 10 years’ literature highlighted 19 articles in which the MTA clinical aspects could be recorded. The results obtained in this article are an important step to demonstrate the safety and predictability of oral rehabilitations with these biomaterials and to promote a line to improve their properties in the future.

show abstract

In Vitro Effect of Putty Calcium Silicate Materials on Human Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells

Cited by 15 publications

References 39 publications

Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model

Biocompatibility of NeoMTA Plus® versus MTA Angelus as delayed furcation perforation repair materials in a dog model

Biological interactions between calcium silicate‐based endodontic biomaterials and periodontal ligament stem cells: A systematic review of in vitro studies

Mineral Trioxide Aggregate Applications in Endodontics: A Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About