Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/219815
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTolosa-Monfà, Alba-
dc.contributor.authorVeroni, Alma-
dc.contributor.authorBlasi Cabús, Joan-
dc.contributor.authorBallester Palacios, M. L. (Maria Lluïsa)-
dc.contributor.authorBerástegui, Esther-
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-18T20:09:25Z-
dc.date.available2025-03-18T20:09:25Z-
dc.date.issued2023-02-01-
dc.identifier.issn1989-5488-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/219815-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The aim of this study was to compare the cytotoxicity of calcium silicate-based endodontic sealer, Bio-C® Sealer, with other calcium silicate-based sealers: BioRoot¿ RCS, one silicon-based sealer combined with calcium silicate particles: GuttaFlow® Bioseal, one resin MTA-based root canal sealer: MTA Fillapex®, and an epoxy resin-based sealer: AH Plus®. Material and Methods: NIH 3T3 fibroblasts were cultured and sealers extracts were obtained. Cytotoxicity was evaluated by the MTS assay and the optical densities of the solutions were measured with a microplate reader. This study was designed with one sample for each control group and n=10 for each treatment group of the different sealants. The results were classified according to the degree of cell viability and underwent statistical analysis with the ANO VA test (p<0.05). The samples were examined under an inverted microscope to evaluate the effect of each sealer on fibroblast cell morphology. Results: Cells incubated with GuttaFlow® Bioseal extract showed the highest cell viability without statistically significant differences with the control group. BioRoot¿ RCS and Bio-C® Sealer showed moderate (tending to slight) cytotoxicity and both AH Plus® and MTA Fillapex® showed severe cytotoxicity in comparison with the control group (p<0.05). AH Plus® and MTA Fillapex® were not significantly different from one another; nor was BioRoot¿ RCS from Bio-C® Sealer. Microscope examination found that fibroblasts in contact with GuttaFlow® Bioseal and Bio-C® Sealer presented the most similar aspects to the control group both in terms of number and shape. Conclusions: Bio-C® Sealer showed moderate (tending to slight) cytotoxicity compared with the control group, GuttaFlow® Bioseal showed no cytotoxicity, BioRoot¿ RCS moderate-slight cytotoxicity and AH Plus® and MTA Fillapex® severe cytotoxicity.-
dc.format.extent8 p.-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherMedicina Oral SL-
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a:-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, 2023, vol. 15, num.2, p. e110-e117-
dc.rights(c) Medicina Oral SL, 2023-
dc.sourceArticles publicats en revistes (Patologia i Terapèutica Experimental)-
dc.subject.classificationBiocompatibilitat-
dc.subject.classificationEndodòncia-
dc.subject.classificationCitotoxicitat per mediació cel·lular-
dc.subject.otherBiocompatibility-
dc.subject.otherEndodontics-
dc.subject.otherCell-mediated cytotoxicity-
dc.titleCytotoxicity comparison of Bio C Sealer against multiple root canal sealers-
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article-
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion-
dc.identifier.idgrec728814-
dc.date.updated2025-03-18T20:09:25Z-
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess-
dc.identifier.pmid36911158-
Appears in Collections:Articles publicats en revistes (Patologia i Terapèutica Experimental)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
255831.pdf1.07 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.