Tadin Antonija, Badrov Marija, Juric Kacunic Danijela, Galic Nada, Macan Matea, Kovacic Ivan, Zeljezic Davor
Department of Restorative Dental Medicine and Endodontics, Study of Dental Medicine, University of Split School of Medicine, 21000 Split, Croatia.
Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Clinical Hospital Centre Split, 21000 Split, Croatia.
J Funct Biomater. 2025 May 9;16(5):169. doi: 10.3390/jfb16050169.
The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of calcium silicate-based sealers (BioRoot RCS and MTA Fillapex) compared to an epoxy-based sealer (AH Plus).
The study was conducted in vitro with the cell lines HepG2 and V79 to evaluate cytotoxicity and genotoxicity using the comet and micronucleus assays. Eluates of the materials were tested at two different concentrations (3 cm/mL and 0.5 cm/mL) after an exposure time of 72 h. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests ( < 0.05).
At lower concentrations in both cell lines, MTA Fillapex showed no significant difference in the measured comet assay parameters compared to the negative control ( > 0.05). In addition, it showed significantly lower genotoxic effects compared to AH Plus for all comet assay parameters, concentrations, and cell lines ( ≤ 0.001). BioRoot RCS showed lower primary DNA damage ( ≤ 0.001) than AH Plus, only at higher concentrations and in the HepG2 cell line. Concerning the two tested bioceramic sealers, BioRoot RCS showed higher tail intensity values compared to MTA Fillapex ( < 0.05). In contrast to the results of the comet assay, BioRoot RCS significantly reduced the number of nuclear buds and nucleoplasmic bridges in the HepG2 cell line compared to MTA Fillapex, whereas reduction in the V79 cell line was only observed for nuclear buds ( < 0.05). Both materials increased the number of apoptotic cells compared to the negative control ( < 0.05). In comparison to AH Plus, BioRoot RCS and MTA Fillapex significantly reduced the number of cells with micronuclei and increased the number of cells with undamaged chromatin ( < 0.05).
The findings suggest that MTA Fillapex and BioRoot RCS exhibit superior biocompatibility over AH Plus, as evidenced by their lower cytotoxic and genotoxic effects in vitro. These results support the use of calcium silicate-based sealers in clinical practice, highlighting the need for further studies to evaluate their performance in vivo and their implications for patient safety.
本研究的主要目的是评估硅酸钙基封闭剂（BioRoot RCS和MTA Fillapex）与环氧基封闭剂（AH Plus）相比的细胞毒性和遗传毒性作用。
本研究在体外使用HepG2和V79细胞系，通过彗星试验和微核试验评估细胞毒性和遗传毒性。材料洗脱液在暴露72小时后以两种不同浓度（3 cm/mL和0.5 cm/mL）进行测试。数据采用Mann-Whitney和Kruskal-Wallis检验进行分析（P<0.05）。
在两种细胞系的较低浓度下，与阴性对照相比，MTA Fillapex在测量的彗星试验参数中无显著差异（P>0.05）。此外，对于所有彗星试验参数、浓度和细胞系，与AH Plus相比，其遗传毒性作用显著更低（P≤0.001）。仅在较高浓度下以及在HepG2细胞系中，BioRoot RCS的原发性DNA损伤低于AH Plus（P≤0.001）。关于两种测试的生物陶瓷封闭剂，与MTA Fillapex相比，BioRoot RCS显示出更高的尾强度值（P<0.05）。与彗星试验结果相反，与MTA Fillapex相比，BioRoot RCS在HepG2细胞系中显著减少了核芽和核质桥的数量，而在V79细胞系中仅观察到核芽数量减少（P<0.05）。与阴性对照相比，两种材料均增加了凋亡细胞的数量（P<0.05）。与AH Plus相比，BioRoot RCS和MTA Fillapex显著减少了含微核细胞的数量，并增加了染色质未受损细胞的数量（P<0.05）。
研究结果表明，MTA Fillapex和BioRoot RCS在体外具有较低的细胞毒性和遗传毒性作用，显示出比AH Plus更好的生物相容性。这些结果支持在临床实践中使用硅酸钙基封闭剂，强调需要进一步研究以评估它们在体内的性能及其对患者安全的影响。
