1
|
Hampe T, Liersch J, Wiechens B, Bürgers R, Krohn S. Bisphenol A release from CAD/CAM splint materials. Eur J Oral Sci 2024; 132:e12993. [PMID: 38778467 DOI: 10.1111/eos.12993] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2023] [Accepted: 04/26/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the bisphenol A (BPA) release from four CAD/CAM splint materials: three polycarbonate-based (DD BioSplint C, Splint Plus Biostar, Temp Premium Flexible) and one polymethylmethacrylate-based (Temp Basic) material. From each material, ten cylindrical samples (n = 40) were immersed in high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) grade water following ISO 10993-12 and incubated for 24 h in an incubation shaker at 37°C and 112 rpm. Following BPA derivatization, analysis was performed by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS). After 24 h of incubation, all investigated materials released significant amounts of BPA compared to water blanks. The material-dependent elution increased in the following order: DD BioSplint C < Splint Plus Biostar < Temp Basic < Temp Premium Flexible. Subtracting extraneous BPA, the concentrations ranged between 2.27 ng/mL and 12.65 ng/mL. After extrapolating the concentrations in relation to the average surface area of occlusal splints, the amount of BPA per mL exceeded the Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) set by the European Union for a person weighing 70 kg by 1.32-6.16 times. Contrary to the release from previously investigated materials, BPA elution from CAD/CAM splint materials was highly elevated. Considering the increasing adaptation of CAD/CAM techniques, elution from them may represent a relevant BPA source in daily dental practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan Hampe
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Julia Liersch
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Bernhard Wiechens
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
- Department of Orthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Ralf Bürgers
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Sebastian Krohn
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
- Department of Orthodontics, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Matsuura T, Stavrou S, Komatsu K, Cheng J, Pham A, Ferreira S, Baba T, Chang TL, Chao D, Ogawa T. Disparity in the Influence of Implant Provisional Materials on Human Gingival Fibroblasts with Different Phases of Cell Settlement: An In Vitro Study. Int J Mol Sci 2023; 25:123. [PMID: 38203293 PMCID: PMC10779283 DOI: 10.3390/ijms25010123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2023] [Revised: 12/13/2023] [Accepted: 12/19/2023] [Indexed: 01/12/2024] Open
Abstract
The development of healthy peri-implant soft tissues is critical to achieving the esthetic and biological success of implant restorations throughout all stages of healing and tissue maturation, starting with provisionalization. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of eight different implant provisional materials on human gingival fibroblasts at various stages of cell settlement by examining initial cell attachment, growth, and function. Eight different specimens-bis-acrylic 1 and 2, flowable and bulk-fill composites, self-curing acrylic 1 and 2, milled acrylic, and titanium (Ti) alloy as a control-were fabricated in rectangular plates (n = 3). The condition of human gingival fibroblasts was divided into two groups: those in direct contact with test materials (contact experiment) and those in close proximity to test materials (proximity experiment). The proximity experiment was further divided into three phases: pre-settlement, early settlement, and late settlement. A cell culture insert containing each test plate was placed into a well where the cells were pre-cultured. The number of attached cells, cell proliferation, resistance to detachment, and collagen production were evaluated. In the contact experiment, bis-acrylics and composites showed detrimental effects on cells. The number of cells attached to milled acrylic and self-curing acrylic was relatively high, being approximately 70% and 20-30%, respectively, of that on Ti alloy. There was a significant difference between self-curing acrylic 1 and 2, even with the same curing modality. The cell retention ability also varied considerably among the materials. Although the detrimental effects were mitigated in the proximity experiment compared to the contact experiment, adverse effects on cell growth and collagen production remained significant during all phases of cell settlement for bis-acrylics and flowable composite. Specifically, the early settlement phase was not sufficient to significantly mitigate the material cytotoxicity. The flowable composite was consistently more cytotoxic than the bulk-fill composite. The harmful effects of the provisional materials on gingival fibroblasts vary considerably depending on the curing modality and compositions. Pre-settlement of cells mitigated the harmful effects, implying the susceptibility to material toxicity varies depending on the progress of wound healing and tissue condition. However, cell pre-settlement was not sufficient to fully restore the fibroblastic function to the normal level. Particularly, the adverse effects of bis-acrylics and flowable composite remained significant. Milled and self-curing acrylic exhibited excellent and acceptable biocompatibility, respectively, compared to other materials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Takanori Matsuura
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| | - Stella Stavrou
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| | - Keiji Komatsu
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| | - James Cheng
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| | - Alisa Pham
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| | | | - Tomomi Baba
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| | - Ting-Ling Chang
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| | - Denny Chao
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| | - Takahiro Ogawa
- Weintraub Center for Reconstructive Biotechnology, Division of Regenerative and Reconstructive Sciences, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA; (S.S.); (J.C.); (A.P.); (T.B.); (T.-L.C.); (D.C.); (T.O.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
A Pilot Study on Monomer and Bisphenol A (BPA) Release from UDMA-Based and Conventional Indirect Veneering Composites. Polymers (Basel) 2022; 14:polym14214580. [PMID: 36365574 PMCID: PMC9656414 DOI: 10.3390/polym14214580] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2022] [Revised: 10/24/2022] [Accepted: 10/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the release of common monomers from conventional (Dialog Vario, Enamel Plus HFO) and UDMA-based indirect veneering composites (VITA VM LC, GC Gradia). Ten cylindrical samples of each material were prepared (n = 40), immersed in HPLC grade water, and incubated for 24 h in an incubation shaker at 37 °C and 112 rpm. Extraction was performed following ISO 10993-12 and monomers were detected and quantified by HPLC-MS/MS. In all the samples, urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA) and bisphenol A (BPA) were quantifiable. Compared to water blanks, BPA levels were only elevated in the eluates from conventional composites. In all other samples, concentrations were in the range of extraneous BPA and were therefore clinically irrelevant. Low concentrations of Bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate (BisGMA) were found in one BPA-free composite and in both conventional materials. Statistical analyses showed that BPA-free materials released significantly less BisGMA and no BPA, while UDMA elution was comparable to elution from conventional materials. All measured concentrations were below reported effective cytotoxic concentrations. Considering these results, the substitution of BPA-derivatives with UDMA might be beneficial since BPA-associated adverse effects are ruled out. Further studies should be enrolled to test the biocompatibility of UDMA on cells of the oral environment.
Collapse
|
4
|
Hampe T, Wiessner A, Frauendorf H, Alhussein M, Karlovsky P, Bürgers R, Krohn S. Monomer Release from Dental Resins: The Current Status on Study Setup, Detection and Quantification for In Vitro Testing. Polymers (Basel) 2022; 14:polym14091790. [PMID: 35566958 PMCID: PMC9100225 DOI: 10.3390/polym14091790] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2022] [Revised: 04/23/2022] [Accepted: 04/25/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Improvements in mechanical properties and a shift of focus towards esthetic dentistry led to the application of dental resins in various areas of dentistry. However, dental resins are not inert in the oral environment and may release monomers and other substances such as Bisphenol-A (BPA) due to incomplete polymerization and intraoral degradation. Current research shows that various monomers present cytotoxic, genotoxic, proinflammatory, and even mutagenic effects. Of these eluting substances, the elution of BPA in the oral environment is of particular interest due to its role as an endocrine disruptor. For this reason, the release of residual monomers and especially BPA from dental resins has been a cause for public concern. The assessment of patient exposure and potential health risks of dental monomers require a reliable experimental and analytical setup. However, the heterogeneous study design applied in current research hinders biocompatibility testing by impeding comparative analysis of different studies and transfer to the clinical situation. Therefore, this review aims to provide information on each step of a robust experimental and analytical in vitro setup that allows the collection of clinically relevant data and future meta-analytical evaluations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan Hampe
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (A.W.); (R.B.); (S.K.)
- Correspondence:
| | - Andreas Wiessner
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (A.W.); (R.B.); (S.K.)
| | - Holm Frauendorf
- Institute for Organic and Biomolecular Chemistry, University of Göttingen, 37077 Göttingen, Germany;
| | - Mohammad Alhussein
- Molecular Phytopathology and Mycotoxin Research, University of Göttingen, 37077 Göttingen, Germany; (M.A.); (P.K.)
| | - Petr Karlovsky
- Molecular Phytopathology and Mycotoxin Research, University of Göttingen, 37077 Göttingen, Germany; (M.A.); (P.K.)
| | - Ralf Bürgers
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (A.W.); (R.B.); (S.K.)
| | - Sebastian Krohn
- Department of Prosthodontics, University Medical Center Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany; (A.W.); (R.B.); (S.K.)
| |
Collapse
|