Cytotoxicity and gelatinolytic activity of a new silicon-based endodontic sealer

A Review of the research methods and progress of biocompatibility evaluation of root canal sealers

The function of root canal sealer was to achieve an appropriate three-dimensional filling effect by filling the root canal and some irregular lumen, thereby inhibiting the residual bacteria. There were many types of sealers, but research to find the most suitable ones was still ongoing. In recent years, researchers had continuously improved the performance of sealers by developing new sealers or adding active ingredients to the sealers. However, most sealers exhibit varying degrees of cytotoxicity and tissue responses, which affect clinical therapy efficacy. This review describes different technical approaches, and recent research progress in the biocompatibility evaluation of root canal sealers and provides brief insights into this field by summarising the performance studies of different root canal sealers.

Postoperative pain intensity and incidence following single visit root canal treatment with different obturation techniques: a randomized clinical trial

Background

There are few studies in the literature about the effect of obturation techniques on postoperative pain. Besides, GuttaFlow2 was used for the first time in this study regarding postoperative pain. This study aimed to compare the postoperative pain levels and incidence following single-visit root canal treatment with different canal filling techniques; cold lateral compaction (CLC), thermoplasticised solid-core carrier (GuttaCore) based filling and cold free-flow compaction (GuttaFlow2) technique.

Methods

The patients (n = 93) having single-rooted teeth with a single canal diagnosed with asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis or single-rooted vital teeth with a single canal requiring endodontic treatment because of prosthetic reasons were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized into three groups (n = 31) according to the obturation technique. A single operator performed all the treatments in a single visit. Data on obturation levels, postoperative pain and analgesic intake frequency were recorded at postoperative 6, 12 and 24 h and daily afterward until the 7^th day. Postoperative pain was measured by visual analogue scale (VAS). The date were statistically analyzed with chi-squared tests (for the analyses of the categorical data), the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test (for the comparisons of VAS score) and with the Friedman test (for the assessments of the changes in VAS scores over time).

Results

The GuttaCore group recorded the higher pain levels, except first 12 h, on the other hand, the GuttaFlow2 group recorded the lower pain levels at all time periods. Significant differences occurred among the groups during the first 4 days (p < 0.05), except at 12 h (p = 0.054). The patients in the CLC and GuttaFlow2 groups did not need to use the prescribed analgesic; however, one patient in the GuttaCore group used it once.

Conclusions

Postoperative pain levels following root canal therapy were affected by the obturation technique especially first 4 days following obturation.

Comparative Evaluation of Cytotoxic and Genotoxic Effects of Three Resin-Based Sealers by 3,(4,5-Dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-Diphenyltetrazolium Bromide Assay and Comet Assay - An In Vitro Study

Background and Aim

The complete sealing of the pulpal space contributes to the better healing potential after an root canal treatment, and root canal sealers are an integral part of this treatment which comes in contact with the periodontal tissue. Biocompatibility of an endodontic sealer plays an important role in the root canal treatment procedure. Hence, the aim of the study was to compare and evaluate the cytotoxicity and genotoxicity effect of three resin-based sealers on human periodontal fibroblast cells.

Settings and Design

This in vitro study was conducted in Dr. Prabhakar Kore's Basic Science and Research Center and K. L. E V. K. Institute of Dental Sciences, Belagavi.

Materials and Methods

Human periodontal fibroblasts were incubated with 15 specimens of Group 1 - AH Plus Group 2 - MTA Fillapex, and Group 3 - GuttaFlow 2, respectively. Cytotoxicity was assessed by 3,(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay and genotoxicity was assessed by Comet assay at time intervals at 24 h and 48 h.

Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-test.

Results

AH Plus and GuttaFlow 2 did not show any cytotoxicity or genotoxicity. MTA Fillapex was slightly cytotoxic throughout the time interval, and it also showed low genotoxicity throughout the time periods for which it was tested.

Conclusion

AH Plus and GuttaFlow 2 did not show any cytotoxic and genotoxic effect; however, MTA Fillapex showed cytotoxic and genotoxic effect throughout the time interval.

Biocompatibility of Root Canal Sealers: A Systematic Review of In Vitro and In Vivo Studies

(1) Aim: To perform a systematic review of the literature on the biocompatibility of root canal sealers that encompasses the various types of sealers that are commercially available as well as both in vitro and in vivo evidence. (2) Methods: This systematic review has been registered in PROSPERO (ID 140445) and was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines using the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, Science Direct, and Web of Science Core Collection. Studies published between 2000 and 11 June 2019 that evaluated cytotoxicity (cell viability/proliferation) and biocompatibility (tissue response) of root canal sealers were included. (3) Results: From a total of 1249 studies, 73 in vitro and 21 in vivo studies were included. In general, studies suggest that root canal sealers elicit mild to severe toxic effects and that several factors may influence biocompatibility, e.g., material setting condition and time, material concentration, and type of exposure. Bioactive endodontic sealers seem to exhibit a lower toxic potential in vitro. (4) Conclusions: The available evidence shows that root canal sealers exhibit variable toxic potential at the cellular and tissue level. However, the methodological heterogeneity among studies included in this systematic review and the somewhat conflicting results do not allow a conclusion on which type of sealer presents higher biocompatibility. Further research is crucial to achieve a better understanding of the biological effects of root canal sealers.

Biocompatibility of a bioceramic silicone-based sealer in subcutaneous tissue

This study evaluated the biocompatibility of a new silicone-based sealer (GuttaFlow Bioseal) in rat subcutaneous tissue and compared the results with those for GuttaFlow2 and AH Plus. Each of 16 Wistar rats received four subcutaneous tissue implants, namely, GuttaFlow Bioseal, GuttaFlow2, AH Plus, and one empty polyethylene tube. Eight rats were euthanized at day 8 and the remaining eight at day 30. Histological sections were stained with haematoxylin and eosin and analysed with a light microscope. Scores were established for inflammatory reaction, macrophage infiltrate, thickness of the fibrous capsule, and vascular changes. Differences between groups were assessed by using the Friedman test with Bonferroni correction. Histological analysis showed that GuttaFlow Bioseal had the lowest inflammatory reaction of all tested sealers at day 8. At day 30, the silicone-based sealers had similar inflammation profiles, but inflammation scores were nonsignificantly higher for AH Plus than for the negative control. The inflammatory reaction decreased from day 8 to day 30 in all sealers. GuttaFlow Bioseal had the most macrophage infiltrate. Under the present experimental conditions, GuttaFlow Bioseal induced limited inflammatory reactions at days 8 and 30, and initial inflammatory reactions to GuttaFlow2 and AH Plus subsided within 30 days. All tested sealers exhibited satisfactory biocompatibility at day 30 after subcutaneous implantation.