Journals / Eurasian Journal of Molecular and Biochemical Sciences / 2023 / Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2

The Effects of Various Dental Restorative Materials on Neuroblastoma Cells

Pages
14–20
Publication Date
2023-10-25
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Although all experimental groups have cytotoxic effects, the least effect is seen in the glass ionomer group.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: Our aim was to investigate the effects of restorative materials such as composite, compomer and glass ionomer, which are frequently used in dentistry, on SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells by evaluating oxidative stress parameters, pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines and apoptosis markers.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Method: Equa Forte, Dyract AP, Tokuyama Estelite P Quick, Omnichroma, Filtek Z250, SureFil SDR flow restorative materials were used in our study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Although all experimental groups have cytotoxic effects, the least effect is seen in the glass ionomer group.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dental filling materials · SHSY5Y · neuroblastoma

Abstract

Introduction: Our aim was to investigate the effects of restorative materials such as composite, compomer and glass ionomer, which are frequently used in dentistry, on SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells by evaluating oxidative stress parameters, pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines and apoptosis markers. Materials and Method: Equa Forte, Dyract AP, Tokuyama Estelite P Quick, Omnichroma, Filtek Z250, SureFil SDR flow restorative materials were used in our study. SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells were cultured with restorative materials. Immunohistochemical staining was performed on the experimental groups with Anti-Bax and Anti-Caspase 9 antibodies. Then, ELISA technique was used to detect TNF-alpha, TGF-beta, IL-1-beta, IL-6, IL-10, LPO and CAT levels. One-way ANOVA analysis was used in the statistical evaluation of the obtained results (p<0.05). Results: In the light of the obtained data, it was observed that the dental filling materials were effective in increasing TGF-beta, IL-10, LPO and CAT levels, and decreasing TNF-alpha, IL-1-beta and IL-6 levels. Histological micrographs also supported the issues. When the H-score levels in the Caspase 9 labeled micrographs were evaluated, the mean of the control group was lower than the mean of the experimental groups. Conclusion: Our study shows that biocompatibility cannot be explained by looking at a single cause. Biocompatibility varies with material content, residual monomer amount and solubility. Although all experimental groups have cytotoxic effects, the least effect is seen in the glass ionomer group.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAYRAM, P., DUZYOL, M., DÜZYOL, E., KARAMEŞE, S. A. (2023). The Effects of Various Dental Restorative Materials on Neuroblastoma Cells. Eurasian Journal of Molecular and Biochemical Sciences, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2, 14–20. https://ajindex.com/articles/1014979

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Rueggeberg FA. From vulcanite to vinyl, a history of resins in restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 2002, 87, 364–379
  2. Modena KC, Casas-Apayco LC, Atta MT, Costa CA, Hebling J, Sipert CR, Navarro MF, Santos CF. Cytotoxicity and biocompatibility of direct and indirect pulp capping materials. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009, 17(6), 544-54
  3. Schmalz G, Arenholt-Bindslev D. Biocompatibility of dental materials (Vol. 1). Berlin: 2009, Springer
  4. Schmalz G, Groppl F, Hiller KA, Wales KM. Three- dimensional human cell cultures for cytotoxicity testing of dental filling materials. Acta stomatologica Croatica. 2014, 48(2), 99
  5. Pelka M, Danzl C, Distler W, Petschelt A. A new screening test for toxicity testing of dental materials. J Dent, 2000, 28(5), 341-345
  6. Schweikl H, Hiller KA, Bolay C, Kreissl M, Kreismann W, Nusser A, Steinhauser S, Weiczork J, Vasold R, Schmalz G. Cytotoxic and mutagenic effects of dental composite materials. Biomaterials. 2005, 26(14), 1713-1719
  7. Ortengren U, Wellendorf H, Karlsson S, Ruyter IE. Water sorption and solubility of dental composites and identification of monomers released in an aqueous environment. J Oral Rehab, 2001, 28(12), 1106-1115
  8. Padbury A, Eber R, Wang HL. Interactions between the gingiva and the margin of restorations. J Clin Periodontol, 2003, 30, 379-385
  9. Pettini F, Savino M, Corsalini M, Cantore S, Ballini A. Cytogenetic genotoxic investigation in peripheral blood lymphocytes of subjects with dental composite restorative filling materials. J Biol regular Homeost agents. 2015, 29(1), 229-33
  10. Sakaguchi RL, Douglas WH, Peters MC. Curing light performance and polymerization of composite restorative materials. J Dent, 1992, 20, 183-188
  11. Rueggeberg FA, Caughman WF, Curtis JW, Davis HC. A predictive model for the polymerization of photo-activated resin composites. Int J Prosthodont, 1994, 7, 159-166
  12. Rueggeberg FA, Caughman WF, Curtis JW. Effect of light intensity and exposure duration on cure of resin composite. Oper Dent, 1994, 19, 26-32
  13. Flury S, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A. Influence of increment thickness on microhardness and dentin bond strength of bulk fill resin composites. Dent Mater, 2014, 30, 1104-1112
  14. Price RB, Derand T, Loney RW, Andreou P. Effect of light source and specimen thickness on the surface hardness of resin composite. Am J Dent, 2002, 15, 47-53
  15. Anusavice KJ, Phillips RW, Shen C, Rawls HR. Phillips' Science of Dental Materials. 2013. Elsevier/Saunders
  16. Ceball