Coaguila-Llerena Hernán, Barbieri Isadora, Tanomaru-Filho Mário, Leonardo Renato de Toledo, Ramos Ana Paula, Faria Gisele
Department of Restorative Dentistry, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Araraquara School of Dentistry, Araraquara, SP, Brazil.
Department of Chemistry, São Paulo University (USP), Ribeirão Preto College of Philosophy Sciences and Letters, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Restor Dent Endod. 2020 Sep 10;45(4):e47. doi: 10.5395/rde.2020.45.e47. eCollection 2020 Nov.
The aim of this study was to assess the physicochemical properties, cytotoxicity and penetration into dentinal tubules of ChlorCid™ Surf (3% sodium hypochlorite [NaOCl] with surfactant) in comparison to ChlorCid™ (3% NaOCl without surfactant).
The physicochemical properties evaluated were pH, surface tension, free available chlorine (FAC) and contact angle. Cytotoxicity was evaluated in L929 fibroblasts exposed to the solutions by 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide and neutral red assays. Assessment of penetration into dentinal tubules was performed by staining single-rooted permanent human teeth with crystal violet ( = 9), which were irrigated with the solutions and analyzed in cervical, middle and apical segments. Data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's -test, 2-way ANOVA and Bonferroni's -test or -test (α = 0.05).
ChlorCid™ Surf and ChlorCid™ FAC values were close to those indicated by the manufacturer. ChlorCid™ Surf showed lower surface tension and contact angle on dentin, and higher pH than ChlorCid™ ( < 0.05). The penetration of ChlorCid™ Surf was higher in cervical and middle segments, compared with ChlorCid™ ( < 0.05). There was no difference in irrigant cytotoxicity ( > 0.05).
ChlorCid™ Surf showed lower surface tension, lower contact angle on root canal dentin, higher penetration into dentinal tubules and more alkaline pH, compared with ChlorCid™. However, both solutions showed similar cytotoxicity and FAC content.
本研究旨在评估ChlorCid™ Surf（含表面活性剂的3%次氯酸钠[NaOCl]）与ChlorCid™（不含表面活性剂的3% NaOCl）相比的理化性质、细胞毒性及对牙本质小管的渗透能力。
评估的理化性质包括pH值、表面张力、游离有效氯（FAC）和接触角。通过3-(4,5-二甲基噻唑-2-基)-2,5-二苯基四氮唑溴盐和中性红试验，对暴露于这些溶液的L929成纤维细胞进行细胞毒性评估。用结晶紫（=9）对单根恒人类牙齿进行染色，然后用这些溶液冲洗，并对颈部、中部和根尖段进行分析，以评估对牙本质小管的渗透情况。数据采用单因素方差分析（ANOVA）和Tukey检验、双因素ANOVA和Bonferroni检验或检验（α = 0.05）进行分析。
ChlorCid™ Surf和ChlorCid™的FAC值接近制造商标明的值。ChlorCid™ Surf在牙本质上的表面张力和接触角较低，pH值高于ChlorCid™（<0.05）。与ChlorCid™相比，ChlorCid™ Surf在颈部和中部段的渗透更高（<0.05）。冲洗液的细胞毒性没有差异（>0.05）。
与ChlorCid™相比，ChlorCid™ Surf表现出更低的表面张力、在根管牙本质上更低的接触角、对牙本质小管更高的渗透以及更高的碱性pH值。然而，两种溶液表现出相似的细胞毒性和FAC含量。
