Suppr超能文献

评价乳胶和非乳胶正畸分离橡皮圈的细胞毒性。

Evaluation of the cytotoxicity of latex and non-latex orthodontic separating elastics.

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

出版信息

Orthod Craniofac Res. 2010 Feb;13(1):28-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2009.01469.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that a difference in cytotoxicity exists between latex and non-latex orthodontic separating elastics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Five intra-oral separating elastics from different manufactures (four latex and one non-latex) were divided into five groups of 15 elastics each: Group MA (non-latex elastics, Masel), Group MO (natural latex, Morelli), Group DE (natural latex, Dentaurum), Group TP (natural latex, TP Orthodontics) and Group UN (natural latex, Unitek). The cytotoxicity assay was performed using cell cultures (epithelial HEp-2 cells originating from human laryngeal carcinoma) that were submitted to the cell viability test with neutral red (dye-uptake) at 24, 48, 72 and 168 h. Analysis of variance (anova) with multiple comparisons and Tukey's test were employed (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

The results showed no statistically significant differences between groups MA, DE, TP and UN in relation to Group CC (cell control) for experimental times of 24, 48 and 168 h (p > 0.05). Morelli, Dentaurum, TP Orthodontics and Unitek elastics induced a great amount of cell lyses at 72 h.

CONCLUSION

One can demonstrate that the Masel elastic induced less cell lysis compared with other elastics, but all trademarks were found to be clinically biocompatible.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Separating orthodontic elastics are used in the interdental subgingival region with the aim to separate the teeth for placement of orthodontic bands. However, latex has been known to cause allergy. As these materials are widely used in clinical orthodontics, care regarding the cytotoxicity of orthodontic elastics should be taken. Thus, clinically proven biocompatible materials should be acquired whenever possible.

摘要

目的

验证这样一个假设,即不同的正畸分离橡皮筋之间存在细胞毒性差异。

材料和方法

来自不同制造商的五种口腔内分离橡皮筋(四种乳胶和一种非乳胶)分为五组,每组 15 个橡皮筋:MA 组(非乳胶橡皮筋,Masel)、MO 组(天然乳胶,Morelli)、DE 组(天然乳胶,Dentaurum)、TP 组(天然乳胶,TP Orthodontics)和 UN 组(天然乳胶,Unitek)。细胞毒性测定采用细胞培养(源自人喉癌的上皮 HEp-2 细胞)进行,用中性红(染料摄取)在 24、48、72 和 168 小时进行细胞活力测试。采用方差分析(anova)和多重比较及 Tukey 检验(p<0.05)。

结果

在 24、48 和 168 小时的实验时间内,MA、DE、TP 和 UN 组与 CC 组(细胞对照)相比,结果均无统计学差异(p>0.05)。Morelli、Dentaurum、TP Orthodontics 和 Unitek 橡皮筋在 72 小时内诱导了大量的细胞溶解。

结论

可以证明 Masel 橡皮筋比其他橡皮筋引起的细胞溶解更少,但所有商标都被认为具有临床生物相容性。

临床意义

正畸分离橡皮筋用于龈下牙周间隙,目的是分离牙齿以放置正畸带。然而,乳胶已被证明会引起过敏。由于这些材料在临床正畸中广泛使用,因此应该注意正畸橡皮筋的细胞毒性。因此,应尽可能获得经临床证实的生物相容性材料。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验