Cytotoxicity of four categories of dental cements

Schmid-Schwap, Martina; Franz, Alexander; König, Franz; Bristela, Margit; Lucas, Trevor; Piehslinger, Eva; Watts, David C.; Schedle, Andreas

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2008.08.002

« Previous Next »Dental Materials
Volume 25, Issue 3 , Pages 360-368, March 2009

Cytotoxicity of four categories of dental cements

Martina Schmid-Schwap
- Department of Prosthodontics, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
Alexander Franz
- Central Research Unit, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
Franz König
- Section of Medical Statistics, Core Unit for Medical Statistics and Informatics, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
Margit Bristela
- Department of Prosthodontics, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
Trevor Lucas
- Center of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
Eva Piehslinger
- Department of Prosthodontics, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
David C. Watts
- School of Dentistry and Photon Science Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
Andreas Schedle
- Central Research Unit, Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Medical University of Vienna, Austria
- Corresponding author at: Bernhard Gottlieb University Clinic of Dentistry, Währingerstrasse 25a, Vienna A-1090, Austria. Tel.: +43 1 4277 67150; fax: +43 1 4277 67159.

Received 15 January 2008; received in revised form 15 July 2008; accepted 13 August 2008.

Abstract

Objectives

Assessment of dental material biocompatibility is gaining increasing importance for both patients and dentists. Dental cements may be in contact with oral soft tissues for prolonged periods of time and play an important role in prosthetic rehabilitation. The aim of the present study was to evaluate eight dental cements using a standardized L929-fibroblast cell culture test.

Methods

For each material, fresh specimens (added to the cultures immediately after preparation) and specimens preincubated for 7 days in cell culture medium were prepared according to the manufacturers’ recommendations. After exposure to test specimens, cell numbers were compared to glass controls. The main outcome was a two-sided 95% confidence interval for the mean value of the standardized cell number for each substance investigated.

Results

Fresh specimens of all tested cements showed significant cytotoxicity, which diminished after 7 days preincubation. Cytotoxicity of fresh adhesive and self-adhesive resin cements was lower when specimens were dual-cured compared to self-cured. A rank order of cytotoxicity was established based on mean values: Nexus 2 (dual-cured) showed least cytotoxicity, followed by Variolink II (dual-cured), Nexus 2 (self-cured), Harvard, RelyxUnicem (dual-cured), Panavia 21, Fujicem, Durelon, Variolink II (self-cured), RelyxUnicem (self-cured), Maxcem (dual-cured) and Maxcem (self-cured). When bondings were added to Nexus 2 or Variolink II specimens, a slight increase in cytotoxicity was observed.

Significance

Adhesive resin cements showed less cytotoxicity than self-adhesive and chemically setting cements. Bonding only slightly influenced cytotoxicity of the adhesive resin cements. Dual-cured specimens of adhesive and self-adhesive resin cements showed significantly less toxicity than self-cured specimens.

Keywords: Toxicology, Biocompatibility, Cell culture, Fibroblasts, Dental cements