Interleukin-1β activity in gingival crevicular fluid of abutment teeth with temporary fixed restorations versus final fixed restorations: Prospective observational study

Abstract

Objective To compare the effect of temporary fixed restorations to final fixed restorations on gingival health of abutment tooth by evaluating the level of IL-1β in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) as an inflammatory biomarker. Subjects and methods It was a nonrandomized prospective observational study. Samples of GCF were collected from 24 participants with provisional and permanent definitive full-coverage restorations with subgingival margin placements at three intervals for each participant: Interval 1, after preparation and immediately before cementation of temporary fixed restoration. Interval 2, after two weeks of temporization and before receiving the final fixed restoration. Interval 3, after two weeks of final fixed restorations. GCF were collected from gingival crevice of the abutment tooth by pre-prepared filter paper with dimensions of 2mmx13mm. They were prepared for IL-1β concentration assay by enzyme-linked immuno sorbent assay – analysis (ELIZA). Results Were analyzed by SAS® software, Descriptive means and medians were used and the repeated ANVOA test was applied (1st interval) showed the highest level of IL-β (13.587 ± 5.735). In 2nd interval the level of IL-β was significantly reduced (9.602 ± 3.279). While, in 3rd interval the level of IL-β was the lowest (6.293 ± 3.279). Conclusion The material and technique of fabrication of both temporary and final fixed restorations are critical for gingival health. PMMA CAD-CAM based temporary restorations showed to be compatible to gingival health by decreasing the level of IL-β level, but the zirconia as a final fixed restoration showed to have optimum compatible effect on gingival health.

Potential Impact of Prosthetic Biomaterials on the Periodontium: A Comprehensive Review

“…This type of restoration is very durable, require a minimally invasive preparation, which allows a greater preservation of the dental tissue, a high resistance to bending and fracture, as well as their translucency property to be retained; however, they are more expensive than metal-ceramic prostheses [47]. As a consequence of the use of this type of biomaterials, less biofilm formation has been found and therefore a more accentuated decrease in the levels of proinflammatory cytokines [26,28,29,31,48]. Of these prosthetic biomaterials, researchers have most frequently analyzed the use of metal-ceramic prostheses followed by zirconium prostheses with the main purpose of knowing their effects on the composition of the subgingival microbiota, the levels of various inflammatory mediators and the periodontal condition to determine which type of prosthetic biomaterial induces a lower inflammatory response and thus to have a therapeutic alternative that maintains the patient's periodontal health [4,6].…”

“…A variety of inflammatory mediators such as IL-1α, TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, MIP-1, IL-8, IL-1ra, CRP, PGE2 and IgG have been used to gain insight into the inflammatory response as a consequence of the use of different prosthetic restorative materials [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][36][37][38][39][40][41] and even some enzymes such as resistin, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase and matrix metalloproteases (MMPs), mainly MMP-2, MMP-8, aMMP-8 and MMP-9, which have been implicated in the destruction of periodontal tissues [26,35] (Table 1). [41] GCF: gingival crevicular fluid; Ni-Cr: nickel-chromium; Cr-Co: chromium-cobalt; Au-Pt: gold-platinum; Cr-Ni-M: chromium-nickel-molybdenum; TNF-α: tumor necrosis factor alpha; CRP: C-reactive protein; YKL-40: chitinase 3like protein 1; AST: aspartate aminotransferase; ALP: alkaline phosphatase; IL-6: interleukin 6; IL-8: interleukin 8; IL-1 α: interleukin 1 alpha; IL-1β: interleukin 1 beta; IL-1ra: interleukin 1 receptor antagonist; MIP-1α: macrophage inflammatory protein 1 alpha; MIP-1β: macrophage inflammatory protein 1 beta; PGE2: prostaglandin E2; MMP-2: matrix metalloprotease 2; MMP-8: matrix metalloprotease 8; aMMP-8: matrix metalloprotease 8 in its active form; MMP-9: matrix metalloprotease 9; TIMP-1: tissue inhibitor of metalloproteases 1; TIMP-2: tissue inhibitor of metalloproteases 2; IgG: immunoglobulin G.…”

“…Several prosthetic materials are used for the fabrication of fixed dental prostheses (as shown in Figure 1 ), including metal-ceramic and metal-free ceramics such as zirconium oxide and lithium disilicate [ 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 ], as well as polymeric materials such as polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), with the latter mainly used for provisional purposes [ 28 , 42 ].…”

“…This type of restoration is very durable, require a minimally invasive preparation, which allows a greater preservation of the dental tissue, a high resistance to bending and fracture, as well as their translucency property to be retained; however, they are more expensive than metal-ceramic prostheses [ 46 ]. As a consequence of the use of this type of biomaterials, less biofilm formation has been found and therefore a more accentuated decrease in the levels of proinflammatory cytokines [ 26 , 28 , 29 , 31 , 47 ].…”

Cytotoxicity and Bonding Property of Bioinspired Nacre-like Ceramic-Polymer Composites

“…With the development of medical technology and material science, as well as the increasing requirements for the repair of tooth defects and missing, the research and development of dental materials become one of the hot research topics. Among the modern dental restorative materials of ceramics, zirconia materials are widely favored by clinicians and patients owing to their high strength, good biocompatibility, low radioactivity and good optical properties ( Chen and Pan, 2019 ; Wu et al, 2020 ; Abo-Elmagd et al, 2021 ). However, the brittleness of zirconia may induce cracking and ultimately lead to the failure of repair.…”