Dental Materials
Volume 14, Issue 6 , Pages 429-440, November 1998

Cytotoxic effects of dental composites, adhesive substances, compomers and cements

  • Andreas Schedle

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General and Experimental Pathology, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA
    • School of Dentistry, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence and reprint requests to: Andreas Schedle, School of Dentistry, University of Vienna, Währingerstraße 25a, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Phone: +43-1-40181-2032; Fax: +43-1-40181-2806
  • ,
  • Alexander Franz

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General and Experimental Pathology, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA
  • ,
  • Xiaohui Rausch-Fan

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General and Experimental Pathology, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA
  • ,
  • Andreas Spittler

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General and Experimental Pathology, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA
  • ,
  • Trevor Lucas

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General and Experimental Pathology, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA
  • ,
  • Puchit Samorapoompichit

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General and Experimental Pathology, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA
  • ,
  • Wolfgang Sperr

      Affiliations

    • School of Dentistry, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA
  • ,
  • George Boltz-Nitulescu

      Affiliations

    • Institute of General and Experimental Pathology, University of Vienna, Vienna, AUSTRIA

Received 25 August 1998; accepted 12 January 1999.

Abstract 

Objectives. Although research interest in biocompatibility of dental materials has been increasing, findings are frequently controversial and non-harmonized experimental approaches often lead to the production of contradictory results. The aim of this study was to compare the cytotoxic effects of six different light-cured dental composites, one compomer, one advanced glass–ionomer, two glass–ionomer cements, two zinc phosphate cements, one calcium hydroxide liner, one composite cement and one carboxylate cement with the same standardized cell-culture system. Two composites, one compomer and pne advanced glass-ionomer were also tested in combination with the appropriate bonding substances and surface primers.

Methods. Specimens were added to the cultures immediately after production or after preincubation for 1, 2 or 7days or 6weeks under cell-culture conditions. Specimens were incubated with L-929 fibroblasts for 72h and cell numbers determined by flow cytometry.

Results. All freshly prepared composite materials were cytotoxic. These effects diminished with increased preincubation times and were not significant after 7days. Combinations of composites and bonding substances were still cytotoxic after preincubation for 7days, but not after 6weeks. Combinations of compomers and bonding substances demonstrated stronger toxicity than composites, although these effects were reduced earlier during preincubation. Glass–ionomer and phosphate cements showed similar effects to the composites with the exception of carboxylate cement, which demonstrated severe and persistent effects even after 6weeks' preincubation. Together, our data provide evidence that all dental materials tested are cytotoxic immediately after production and that these effects are reduced after different preincubation periods in most cases.

Significance. Tested with a standardized cell-culture system, differences in toxicological potency between various commonly used dental materials were observed. Cytotoxicity data from standardized protocols should form the basis of screening the cytotoxic effects of new materials.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0300-5712(99)00018-4

Dental Materials
Volume 14, Issue 6 , Pages 429-440, November 1998