Cytotoxicity evaluation of Gutta Flow and Endo Sequence BC sealers.

OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the cytotoxicity of GuttaFlow and EndoSequence BC sealers and compared them with AH Plus and Tubli-Seal sealers. STUDY DESIGN Samples (0.5 mg) of freshly mixed or set BC, GuttaFlow, AH Plus, and Tubli-Seal sealers were eluted with 300, 600, and 1,000 μL cell culture medium for 24 and 72 hours. L929 cells were seeded into 96-well plates at 3 × 10(4) cells/well and cultured with 100 μL eluate from each eluate group. Cells cultured only with culture medium served as control. After 24 hours' incubation, the cytotoxicity was evaluated by MTT assay. Cell viability was calculated as the percentage of the control group, and the results were analyzed with a one-way analysis of variance. RESULTS For the freshly mixed sealer, cell viability in the AH Plus group was less than in all of the other 3 sealer groups. The Tubli-Seal sealer group had less cell viability than the EndoSequence BC and GuttaFlow sealer groups. For the set sealer, the Tubli-Seal and AH Plus groups had less cell viability than the EndoSequence BC and GuttaFlow sealer groups. There was no cell viability difference between the EndoSequence BC and GuttaFlow sealer groups in the either freshly mixed or set sealer group. CONCLUSIONS The GuttaFlow and EndoSequence BC sealers have lower cytotoxicity than the AH Plus and Tubli-Seal sealers.

[1]  F. Tay,et al.  Initial in vitro biological response to contemporary endodontic sealers. , 2006, Journal of endodontics.

[2]  L. Spångberg,et al.  AH26 releases formaldehyde , 1993 .

[3]  Ya Shen,et al.  Antibacterial activity of endodontic sealers by modified direct contact test against Enterococcus faecalis. , 2009, Journal of endodontics.

[4]  D. Ørstavik,et al.  Cytotoxicity of new resin-, calcium hydroxide- and silicone-based root canal sealers on fibroblasts derived from human gingiva and L929 cell lines. , 2007, International endodontic journal.

[5]  J. Wataha,et al.  Long-term sealing ability of Pulp Canal Sealer, AH-Plus, GuttaFlow and Epiphany. , 2008, International endodontic journal.

[6]  Jin Jiang,et al.  Cytotoxicity evaluation of endosequence root repair material. , 2010, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[7]  D. Ørstavik,et al.  A laboratory assessment of coronal bacterial leakage in root canals filled with new and conventional sealers. , 2009, International endodontic journal.

[8]  Jin Jiang,et al.  Cytotoxicity evaluation of Activ GP and Resilon sealers in vitro. , 2009, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[9]  R. Love,et al.  Biocompatibility of dental materials used in contemporary endodontic therapy: a review. Part 2. Root-canal-filling materials. , 2003, International endodontic journal.

[10]  D. Ørstavik,et al.  Toxicity evaluation of root canal sealers in vitro. , 2007, International endodontic journal.

[11]  S. Friedman,et al.  Short-term cytotoxicity assessment of components of the epiphany resin-percha obturating system by indirect and direct contact millipore filter assays. , 2007, Journal of endodontics.

[12]  K. Kodonas,et al.  Short- and long-term sealing ability of Gutta-flow and AH-Plus using an ex vivo fluid transport model. , 2010, International endodontic journal.

[13]  D. Salvadori,et al.  Ex vivo biocompatibility tests of regular and white forms of mineral trioxide aggregate. , 2006, International endodontic journal.

[14]  M. T. Filho,et al.  Release of formaldehyde by 4 endodontic sealers. , 1999, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[15]  B. Peng,et al.  Ex vivo cytotoxicity of a new calcium silicate-based canal filling material. , 2010, International endodontic journal.

[16]  B. Peng,et al.  Assessment of a new root canal sealer's apical sealing ability. , 2009, Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology, oral radiology, and endodontics.

[17]  L. Spångberg,et al.  AH 26 releases formaldehyde. , 1993, Journal of endodontics.

[18]  F. Tay,et al.  In vitro cytotoxicity evaluation of a self-adhesive, methacrylate resin-based root canal sealer. , 2008, Journal of endodontics.

[19]  M. Bonnaure-Mallet,et al.  Evaluation of the cytocompatibility of three endodontic materials. , 1999, Journal of endodontics.

[20]  M. Wheater,et al.  Cytotoxicity comparison of mineral trioxide aggregates and EndoSequence bioceramic root repair materials. , 2011, Journal of endodontics.

[21]  G. Omurtag,et al.  Comparision of biocompatibility and cytotoxicity of two new root canal sealers. , 2010, Acta histochemica.

[22]  V. Kašuba,et al.  In vitro genotoxicity of root canal sealers. , 2009, International endodontic journal.

[23]  C. Kao,et al.  Root canal sealers induce cytotoxicity and necrosis , 2004, Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine.

[24]  G. Schmalz.  Root Canal Filling Materials , 2009 .

[25]  T. P. Serene,et al.  Complement activation as a possible in vitro indication of the inflammatory potential of endodontic materials. , 1988, Oral surgery, oral medicine, and oral pathology.

[26]  M. Haapasalo,et al.  Dentin enhances the antibacterial effect of mineral trioxide aggregate and bioaggregate. , 2009, Journal of endodontics.