Journals / Ondokuz Mayıs Üniv. Diş Hekimliği Derg. / 2009 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2

Evaluation technioues of biocompatibiliy of materials in dentistry

Dişhekimliğinde kullanılan materyallerin biyouyumluluk değerlendirme yöntemleri

Pages
41–49
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)

These tests are also rapid, cheap and reproducible.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Because of the biomaterials play a major role in the medical field and increasing interest of the patients for the biocompability and esthetics, biocompatibility of the materials in dentistry has been widely analysed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Many different methods, including both in vivo and ex vivo tests, have been described for assessing the biocompatibility of dental materials.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These tests are also rapid, cheap and reproducible.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Malzeme testi · Biyouyumlu materyaller · Materials Testing

Abstract

Because of the biomaterials play a major role in the medical field and increasing interest of the patients for the biocompability and esthetics, biocompatibility of the materials in dentistry has been widely analysed. Many different methods, including both in vivo and ex vivo tests, have been described for assessing the biocompatibility of dental materials. Recently, laboratory tests have been used to determine the cytotoxicity of dental materials. Such tests offer the opportunity to study toxicity directly or through the release of components of the material. These tests are also rapid, cheap and reproducible.

Özet

Biyomateryallerin tıp alanında oynadıkları rol ve hastaların biyouyum ve estetiğe karşı olan ilgilerinin artması sebebiyle dişhekiml iğinde kul lanı lan materyal lerin biyouyumlulukları sıkl ıkla test edilmektedir. Dental materyallerin biyolojik uyumunun değerlendirilmesi amacıyla in vivo ve invitro testlerinde i ç e r i s inde bulunduğu bi r çok far k l ı me tod kullanılmaktadır. Günümüzde dişhekimliğinde kullanılan materyallerin sitotoksisitesinin araştırılmasında laboratuvar testleri kullanılmaktadır. Bu testler kullanılan materyallerin içeriğinin toksisitesi üzerinde çalışılmasına olanak tanımakla beraber hızlı, ucuz ve tekrar üretilebilirdir.

🔖

Cite This Article

PİŞKİN, B., AVSEVER, H., GÜNDÜZ, K. (2009). Evaluation technioues of biocompatibiliy of materials in dentistry. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniv. Diş Hekimliği Derg., Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 2, 41–49. https://ajindex.com/articles/293172

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Murray PE, Godoy CG, Godoy FG. How is the biocompatibility of dental materials evaluated. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2007;12:258-66
  2. Böchle M, Kohal RJ. A systematic review of the influence of different titanium surface on proliferetaioni differentiation and protein synthesis of osteoblast-like MG63 cells. Clin Oral Impl. Res. 2004;15:683-92
  3. Wataha JC, Hanks CT. Biocompatibility testingwhat can we anticipate?. Trans Acad Dent Mater. 1997;109-20
  4. Wataha JC. Principles of biocompatibility for dental practitioners. J Prosthet Dent. 2001; 86:203-209
  5. Schmalz G. Materials science: biological aspects. J Dent Res 2002;81:660-63
  6. Ekwall B. Validation of in vitro tests for general toxicity. Altern Animal Test Experiment. 1992;1:127-41
  7. Murray PE, Godoy FG. Comparison of the clinical and preclinical biocompatibility testing of dental materials: are the ISO usage tests meaningful?. J Biomed Mater Res. 2007;81:51-58
  8. Hauman CHJ, Love RM. Biocompatibility of dental materials used in contemporary endodontic therapy: a review. part 1. Intracanal drugs and substances. Int Endodon J. 2003;36:75-85
  9. Schmalz G. Concept in biocompatibility testing of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Invest. 1997;1:154-62. 10.Nicola C, Borzea D, Moldovan M, Prejmerean C. An experimental dental indirect composite resin- biological and clinical trials. Eu Cells and Mater. 2005;9:12-13. 11.Schmid-Schwap M, Franz A, König F, Bristela M, Lucas T, Piehslinger E, Watss DC, Schedle A. Cytotoxicity of four categories of dental cements. Dent Mater. 2009;25:360-68. 12.Kumari TV, Vasudev U, Kumar A, Menon B. Cell sur f a c e int e r a c t ions in the s tudy of biocompatibility. Trends Biomater Artif Organs. 2002;15:37-41. 13.Dahl JE, Frangou-Polyzois MJ, Polyzois GL. In vitro biocompatibility of denture relining materials. Gerodontology. 2006;23:17-22. 14.Katoni M, Masamoto Y, Watanabe M. An alternative study of the skin irritatnt effect of an homologous series of surfactans. Toxic in Vitro. 1994;8:229-33. 15.Vannet BV, Mohebbian N, Wehrbein H. Toxicity of used orthodontic archwires assessed by three-dimensional cell culture. Eu J Orthodon. 2006;28:426-32. 16.Moharamzadeh K, Noort RV, Brook IM, Scutt AM. Cytotoxicity of resin monomers on human gingival fibroblast and HaCaT keratinocytes. Dent Mater. 2007;23:40-44. 17.Ozen J, Atay A, Toksoy Topcu F, Ural AU, Dalkız M, Tunca YM. Analysis of the cytotoxicity of four denting bonding agents on gingival fibroblast. Turk J