Universidade Federal de Pelotas , Dental School , Department of Restorative Dentistry , Pelotas , RS , Brazil .
Autonomous University of Hidalgo State , Academic Area of Dentistry , Dental Materials Laboratory , San Agustín , Tlaxiaca , Mexico .
Braz Oral Res. 2021 Mar 3;35:e045. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2021.vol35.0045. eCollection 2021.
The objective of this study was to evaluate the biocompatibility and mechanical properties of two commercially available and one experimental periodontal dressing materials. The cytotoxicity of Periobond ® , Barricaid ® and one experimental periodontal dressing based on Exothane ® 8 monomer was tested on 3T3/NIH mouse fibroblast. Genotoxicity was assessed by micronuclei formation, and cell alterations were analyzed using light microscopy. Both biological assays were performed using the eluate obtained from specimens after 24, 72, or 168 hours of incubation. Mechanical characterization was assessed through the ultimate tensile strength and the water sorption and solubility tests. The significance level of α = 0.05 was used for all statistical analyses. All the materials promoted a cell viability lower than 60% in all evaluated times. In general, the cell viability was significantly reduced after 72 and 168h of specimens' incubation. Considering the factor material, there were not statistical differences in the cell viability (p = 0.156). The genotoxicity was not statistically significant among the groups in the different periods of time (p > 0.05). Differences in the ultimate tensile strength values were not statistically significant different among the groups (p = 0.125). Periobond ® showed the higher water sorption values (p < 0.001). Regarding solubility, there were no statistical differences between the groups (p = 0.098). All the periodontal dressing materials evaluated in this study exerted a cytotoxic effect against mouse fibroblasts, and their toxicity became more evident over time. Among the materials evaluated, the experimental light-cure type has shown overall similar properties to the commercial references.
本研究的目的是评估两种市售和一种实验性牙周敷料材料的生物相容性和机械性能。将 Periobond ® 、 Barricaid ® 和一种基于 Exothane ® 8 单体的实验性牙周敷料的细胞毒性作用在 3T3/NIH 小鼠成纤维细胞上进行测试。通过微核形成评估遗传毒性，并用光学显微镜分析细胞变化。两种生物测定均使用在 24、72 或 168 小时孵育后从标本中获得的浸提液进行。通过极限拉伸强度和水吸附及溶解度测试评估机械特性。所有统计分析均使用α=0.05 的显著性水平。所有材料在所有评估时间内均导致细胞活力低于 60%。通常，在标本孵育 72 和 168 小时后，细胞活力明显降低。考虑到材料因素，细胞活力在不同时期的组间没有统计学差异（p=0.156）。在不同时期的组间，遗传毒性没有统计学差异（p＞0.05）。各组之间的极限拉伸强度值差异无统计学意义（p=0.125）。Periobond ® 显示出较高的吸水率（p＜0.001）。关于溶解度，组间没有统计学差异（p=0.098）。本研究评估的所有牙周敷料材料对小鼠成纤维细胞均表现出细胞毒性作用，且其毒性随时间推移而更加明显。在所评估的材料中，实验性光固化型总体上显示出与商业参考材料相似的性质。
