Comparison of different test models for the assessment of cytotoxicity of composite resins

This study compared the use of different test models to assess the cytotoxicity of a dental composite. The cytotoxicity of a composite polymerized using two halogen‐based light‐curing units (LCUs) (Max LC and Astralis) and two light‐emitting diode LCUs (E‐light and Freelight) served as the basis of comparison. Disk‐shaped specimens (7 mm diameter, 2 mm high) were fabricated using the four different light sources. The specimens were used in several cytotoxicity test models: direct and indirect contact tests as well as an extract test with an established cell line L‐929. The cells were stained with neutral red after cell‐material contact for 48 h. Neutral red‐stained areas (in mm2, for direct and indirect tests) and absorbance readings (for extract tests) were analysed statistically using ANOVA and the Tukey post hoc test, with P < 0.05 considered to be significantly different. Good correlation between direct and indirect contact tests (r = 0.903) was found. The extract test was the least correlated among the three tests. It was found that the E‐light + Freelight‐cured composite elicited cytotoxicity from the correlated studies. Uncured specimens were most detrimental to the cells in all tests. Our data demonstrated that composite cured with light‐emitting diode LCUs were cytotoxic to L‐929 cells. Different test models were found to give rise to different findings. Thus, a good cell‐material contact method would replicate more closely the physiological situation in vivo. This in turn would give more clinically relevant results. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  J. Ferracane,et al.  The in vitro cytotoxicity of eluates from dentin bonding resins and their effect on tyrosine phosphorylation of L929 cells. , 2001, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[2]  J. Wataha,et al.  Effect of cell line on in vitro metal ion cytotoxicity. , 1994, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[3]  H. Shintani,et al.  Residual monomers (TEGDMA and Bis-GMA) of a set visible-light-cured dental composite resin when immersed in water. , 1991, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[4]  K. Jandt,et al.  Light-emitting diode (LED) polymerisation of dental composites: flexural properties and polymerisation potential. , 2000, Biomaterials.

[5]  W. Geurtsen,et al.  Substances released from dental resin composites and glass ionomer cements. , 1998, European journal of oral sciences.

[6]  G. Sjögren,et al.  Cytotoxicity of dental alloys, metals, and ceramics assessed by millipore filter, agar overlay, and MTT tests. , 2000, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[7]  K. Jandt,et al.  Knoop hardness depth profiles and compressive strength of selected dental composites polymerized with halogen and LED light curing technologies. , 2002, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[8]  Franz König,et al.  Cytotoxic effects of packable and nonpackable dental composites. , 2003, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[9]  J. Ferracane Elution of leachable components from composites. , 1994, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[10]  A. Kortsaris,et al.  In vitro evaluation of the cytotoxicity of two glass-ionomer root canal sealers. , 1997, Journal of endodontics.

[11]  L. Spångberg Correlation of in vivo and in vitro screening tests. , 1978, Journal of endodontics.

[12]  Emma-Christin Lönnroth,et al.  Cytotoxicity of liquids and powders of chemically different dental materials evaluated using dimethylthiazol diphenyltetrazolium and neutral red tests , 2003, Acta odontologica Scandinavica.

[13]  E. Borenfreund,et al.  A simple quantitative procedure using monolayer cultures for cytotoxicity assays (HTD/NR-90) , 1985 .

[14]  I. Mjör,et al.  Biological evaluation of dental restorative materials--a comparison of different test methods. , 1983, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[15]  G. Pearson,et al.  Water sorption and solubility of resin-based materials following inadequate polymerization by a visible-light curing system. , 1989, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[16]  J. Wataha,et al.  In vitro models of biocompatibility: a review. , 1996, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[17]  J. Nicholson,et al.  An evaluation of accelerated Portland cement as a restorative material. , 2002, Biomaterials.

[18]  G. Caughman,et al.  Correlation of cytotoxicity, filler loading and curing time of dental composites. , 1991, Biomaterials.

[19]  G. Leyhausen,et al.  Residual Monomer/Additive Release and Variability in Cytotoxicity of Light-curing Glass-ionomer Cements and Compomers , 1998, Journal of dental research.

[20]  G. Sletten,et al.  Cytotoxic effects of extracts of compomers. , 1999, Acta odontologica Scandinavica.

[21]  W. Sperr,et al.  Cytotoxic effects of dental composites, adhesive substances, compomers and cements. , 1998, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[22]  Y-K Lee,et al.  Degree of polymerization of resin composites by different light sources. , 2002, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[23]  J. Wataha,et al.  In vitro biological response to core and flowable dental restorative materials. , 2003, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[24]  A. Nalçaci,et al.  Cytotoxicity of composite resins polymerized with different curing methods. , 2004, International endodontic journal.

[25]  K. Jandt,et al.  Depth of cure and compressive strength of dental composites cured with blue light emitting diodes (LEDs). , 2000, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[26]  J. Hebling,et al.  Effects of light-curing time on the cytotoxicity of a restorative resin composite applied to an immortalized odontoblast-cell line. , 2003, Operative dentistry.

[27]  Y. Li,et al.  In vitro evaluation of biocompatibility of experimental titanium alloys for dental restorations. , 1998, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[28]  G. Leyhausen,et al.  Cytotoxicity of 35 dental resin composite monomers/additives in permanent 3T3 and three human primary fibroblast cultures. , 1998, Journal of biomedical materials research.

[29]  H Budzikiewicz,et al.  Determination of leachable components from four commercial dental composites by gas and liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. , 1998, Journal of dentistry.

[30]  K. Hiller,et al.  Responses of L929 mouse fibroblasts, primary and immortalized bovine dental papilla-derived cell lines to dental resin components. , 2002, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[31]  R. Sydiskis,et al.  In vitro cytotoxicity of orthodontic bonding materials. , 1983, American journal of orthodontics.

[32]  A. Bush,et al.  A comparison of polymerization by light-emitting diode and halogen-based light-curing units. , 2002, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[33]  J L Ferracane,et al.  A Comparison of Four Modes of Evaluating Depth of Cure of Light-activated Composites , 1987, Journal of dental research.

[34]  G. Leyhausen,et al.  Biocompatibility of various light-curing and one conventional glass-ionomer cement. , 1998, Biomaterials.