| Autor: |
Scelza MZ; Department of Endodontics and Geriatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, UFF - Universidade Federal Fluminse, Niterói, RJ, Brazil., Caldas IP; Doctoral Program in Dentistry, UFF - Universidade Federal Fluminse, Niterói, RJ, Brazil., Mattos JM; Laboratory of Experimental Cell Culture (LECCel), UFF - Universidade Federal Fluminse, Niterói, RJ, Brazil., Oliveira F; Laboratory of Experimental Cell Culture (LECCel), UFF - Universidade Federal Fluminse, Niterói, RJ, Brazil., Carvalho W; Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, UFF - Universidade Federal Fluminse, Niterói, RJ, Brazil., Alves GG; Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Institute of Biology, UFF - Universidade Federal Fluminse, Niterói, RJ, Brazil. |
| Abstrakt: |
This study aimed to compare the cytotoxicity of the Vita AC12, Lava Ultimate, Vita Enamic and InSync indirect restorative materials. Extracts of each material were prepared by incubation for 1, 7 and 40 days, with daily washing. Human gingival fibroblasts were exposed to the extracts, and cell viability was evaluated by sequential assessment of mitochondrial activity (XTT), membrane integrity (NRU) and cell density (CVDE). Extracts of polystyrene beads and latex fragments were used as negative and positive controls, respectively. Differences between groups and experimental times were evaluated by analysis of variance. At the 24 h extraction, significant differences between the control and both Vita AC-12 and InSync were observed in the XTT assay (p<0.05), and between the control and both Enamic and Lava Ultimate, in the CVDE assay (p<0.05). AC12, Lava Ultimate, and InSync presented significantly lower cell viability than Enamic and the control group, in the NRU assay (p<0.05). The Vita Enamic and Lava Ultimate hybrid ceramic-like materials presented better biocompatibility at the 24 h extraction time point than the AC12 and InSync ceramic materials. However, a simulation of the removal of toxic components by biological fluids, conducted by using longer extraction times and daily washing, led to the absence of cytotoxicity in all the tested restorative materials. These findings can be viewed as positive for the clinical indication of these restorative materials, considering their contact with adjacent soft tissues for extended periods of time. |
