In vitro analysis of the cytotoxicity and the antimicrobial effect of four endodontic sealers

Head & Face Medicine

Brita Willershausen¹  Benjamin Briseño¹  Angelika Callaway¹  Ines Willershausen¹ 

[1] Department of Operative Dentistry, University Medical Centre of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany

关键词: cytotoxicity;    E. faecalis P. micra;    root canal sealer;    in vitro study;   

Others  :  819542
DOI  :  10.1186/1746-160X-7-15

 received in 2011-04-21, accepted in 2011-08-10,  发布年份 2011

【 摘 要 】

Introduction

The aim of this study was to investigate in vitro the cytotoxicity and antibacterial properties of four different endodontic sealers using human periodontal ligament fibroblast cell proliferation and visual analysis of growth inhibition.

Methods

A silicone (GuttaFlow), silicate (EndoSequence BC), zinc oxide eugenol (Pulp Canal Sealer EWT) and epoxy resin (AH Plus Jet) based sealer were incubated with PDL fibroblasts (10⁴ cells/ml, n = 6) up to 96 h. Cell proliferation (RFU) was determined by means of the Alamar Blue assay. Cell growth and morphology was visualized by means of fluorescent dyes. Possible antibacterial properties of the different sealers were visualized by means of SEM (Enterococcus faecalis; Parvimonas micra).

Results

Fibroblast proliferation depended on sealer and cultivation time. After 72 and 96 h GuttaFlow and EndoSequence BC showed relatively non-cytotoxic reactions, while Pulp Canal Sealer EWT and AH Plus Jet caused a significant decrease of cell proliferation (p < 0.001). Visualization of cell growth and morphology with various fluorescent dyes supplemented the results. No antibacterial effect of EndoSequence BC to P. micra was found, whereas GuttaFlow showed a weak, Pulp Canal Sealer EWT and AH Plus Jet extensive growth inhibition. Also, no antibacterial effect of GuttaFlow, EndoSequence BC or AH Plus Jet to E. faecalis could be detected.

Conclusions

These in vitro findings reveal that GuttaFlow and EndoSequence BC can be considered as biocompatible sealing materials. However, prior to their clinical employment, studies regarding their sealing properties also need to be considered.

【 授权许可】

   
2011 Willershausen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Friedman S, Mor C: The success of endodontic therapy-healing and functionality. J Calif Dent Assoc 2004, 6:493-503.
• [2]Salehrabi R, Rotstein I: Endodontic treatment outcomes in a large population in the USA: an epidemiological study. J Endod 2004, 30:846-850.
• [3]Friedmann S, Abitbol S, Lawrence HP: Treatment outcome in endodontics: the Toronto Study. Phase 1: initial treatment. J Endod 2003, 29:787-793.
• [4]Dawson AS, Cardaci SC: Endodontics versus implantology: To extirpate or integrate? Aust Endod J 2006, 32:57-63.
• [5]Bratel J, Jontell M, Dahlgren U, Bergenholtz G: Effects of root canal sealers on immunocompetent cells in vitro and in vivo. Int Endod J 1998, 31:178-188.
• [6]Saunders WP, Saunders EM: Coronal leakage as a cause of failure in root canal therapy: a review. Endod Dent Traumatol 1994, 10:105-108.
• [7]Yamaguchi K, Matsunaga T, Hayashi Y: Gross extrusion of endodontic obturation materials into maxillary sinus: a case report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007, 104:131-134.
• [8]Nair PN: Pathogenesis of apical periodontitis and the causes of endodontic failures. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2004, 15:348-381.
• [9]Al-Khatar N, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R: Apical leakage of new root canal sealers. J Dent Res 1995, 74:945.
• [10]Koulaouzidou EA, Papazisis KT, Beltes P, Geromichalos GD, Kortsaris AH: Cytotoxicity of three resin-based root canal sealers: an in vitro evaluation. Endod Dent Traumatol 1998, 14:182-185.
• [11]Neff T, Layman D, Jeansonne BG: In vitro cytotoxicity evaluation of endodontic sealers exposed to heat before assay. J Endod 2002, 28:12.
• [12]Bouillaguet S, Wataha JC, Tay FR, Brackett MG, Lockwood PE: Initial in vitro biological response to contemporary endodontic sealers. J Endod 2006, 32:989-992.
• [13]Brackett M, Martin R, Sword J, Oxford C, Rueggeberg FA, Tay FR, Pashley DH: Comparison of seal after obturation techniques using a polydimethylsiloxane-based root canal sealer. J Endod 2006, 32:1188-1190.
• [14]Schweikl H, Schmalz G, Federlin M: Mutagenicity of the root canal sealer AHPlus in the Amen test. Clin Oral Investig 1998, 2:125-129.
• [15]Azar NG, Heidari M, Bahrami ZS, Shokri F: In vitro cytotoxicity of a new epoxy resin root canal sealer. J Endod 2000, 26:462-466.
• [16]Cohen BI, Pagnillo MK, Musikant BL, Deutsch AS: An in vitro study of the cytoxicity of two root canal sealers. J Endod 2000, 26:4.
• [17]Sousa CJA, Montes CRM, Pasco EA, Loyola AM, Versiami MA: Comparison of the intraosseous Biocompatibility of AH Plus, Endo REZ, and Epiphany Root Canal sealers. J Endod 2006, 32:656-662.
• [18]Zielinski TM, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG: An evaluation of Guttaflow and gutta-percha in the filling of lateral grooves and depressions. J Endod 2008, 34:295-298.
• [19]AlAnezi AZ, Jiang J, Safavi KE, Spanberg LS, Zhu Q: Cytotoxicity evaluation of endosequence root repair material. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Path Oral Endod 2010, 109:122-125.
• [20]El Karim I, Kennedy J, Hussey D: The antimicrobial effects of root canal irrigation and medication. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2007, 103:560-569.
• [21]Weiss EI, Shalhav M, Fuss Z: Assessment of antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers by direct contact test. Endod Dent Traumatol 1996, 12:179-184.
• [22]Cobankara FK, Altinöz HC, Ergani O, Kav K, Belli S: In vitro antibacterial activities of root-canal sealers by using two different methods. J Endod 2004, 30:57-60.
• [23]Bodrumlu E, Semiz M: Antibacterial activity of a new endodontic sealer against Enterococcus faecalis. J Can Dent Assoc 2006, 72:637.
• [24]Eldeniz AU, Erdemir A, Hadimli HH, Belli S, Erganis O: Assessment of antibacterial activity of EndoREZ. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2006, 102:119-126.
• [25]Miyagak DC, de Carvalho EM, Robazza CR, Chavasco JK, Levorato GL: In vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of endodontic sealers. Braz Oral Res 2006, 20:303-306.
• [26]Slutzky-Goldberg J, Slutzky H, Solomonow M, Moshonov J, Weiss EI, Matalon S: Antibacterial properties of four endodontic sealers. J Endod 2008, 43:735-738.
• [27]Zhang H, Shen Y, Ruse ND, Haapasalo M: Antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers by modified direct contact test against Enterococcus faecalis. J Endod 2009, 35:1051-1055.
• [28]Pinheiro CR, Guinesi AS, Pizzolitto AC, Bonetti-Filho I: In vitro antimicrobial activity of acroseal, prolifil and epiphany against Enterococcus faecalis. Braz Dent J 2009, 20:107-111.
• [29]Baer J, Maki JS: In vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial effect of three endodontic sealers mixed with amoxicillin. J Endod 2010, 36:1170-1173.
• [30]Siqueira JF Jr, Rôcas IN: Clinical implications and microbiology of bacterial persistence after treatment procedures. J Endod 2008, 43:1291-1301.
• [31]Nekoofar MH, Namazikhah MS, Sheykhrezae MS, Mohammadi MM, Kazemi A, Aseeley Z, Dummer PM: pH of pus collected from periapical abscesses. Int Endod J 2009, 42:534-538.
• [32]Bysrom A, Sundqvist G: The antibacterial action of sodium hypochlorite and EDTA in 60 cases of endodontic therapy. Int Endod J 1985, 18:35-40.
• [33]Rôcas IN, Siqueira JE: Comparison of the in vivo antimicrobial effectiveness of sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine used as a root canal irrigants. A molecular microbial study. J Endod 2011, 37:143-150.
• [34]Wu MK, Dummer PM, Wesselink PR: Consequences of and strategies to deal with residual post-treatment root canal infection. Int Endod J 2006, 39:343-356.
• [35]Oguntebi BR: Dentine tubule infection and endodontic therapy implications. Int Endod J 1994, 27:218-222.
• [36]Tronstad L, Andreasen JO, Hasselgren G, Kristerson L, Riisi I: pH changes in dental tissues after root canal filling with calcium hydroxide. J Endod 1981, 7:12-21.
• [37]Esberard RM, Garnes DL Jr, del Rio CE: Changes in pH at the dentin surface in roots obturated with calcium hydroxide pastes. J Endod 1996, 22:402-405.
• [38]Tanomaru JM, Leonardo MR, Tanomaru Filho M, Bonetti Filho I, Silva LA: Effect of different irrigation solutions and calcium hydroxide on bacterial LPS. Int Endod J 2003, 36:733-739.
• [39]Brackett MG, Messer RL, Lockwood PE, Bryan TE, Lewis JB, Bouillaguet S, Wataha JC: Cytotoxic response of three cell lines exposed in vitro to dental endodontic sealers. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2010, 95:380-386.
• [40]Camargo CH, Camargo SE, Valera MC, Hiller KA, Schmalz G, Schweikel H: The induction of cytotoxicity, oxidative stress and genotoxicity by root canal sealers in mammalian cells. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009, 108:952-960.
• [41]Grossman LI: Root canal therapy. Kimpton, London; 1940.
• [42]Batur YB, Ersev H: Five-year follow-up of a root canal filling material in the maxillary sinus: a case report. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 2008, 106:e54-56.
• [43]Zmener O: Tissue response to a new methacrylate-based root canal sealer: Preliminary observations in the subcutaneous connective tissue of rats. J Endo 2004, 30:348-351.