ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate the tissue response and the biomineralization ability of CER prepared with epoxy resin or water compared to Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA). Material and Methods: Polyethylene tubes containing materials or empty tubes for control were inserted into the subcutaneous tissues of 30 rats. After 7, 15, 30, 60, and 90 days, the rats were killed and the tubes were removed for analysis using hematoxylin-eosin staining, von Kossa staining, and under polarized light. Inflammation was graded through a score system; the thickness of the fibrous capsule was classified as thin or thick; the biomineralization ability was recorded as present or absent. The results were statistically analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (p<0.05). Results: Histologic analysis performed after 7 and 15 days for CER prepared with epoxy resin or water and for MTA showed moderate inflammation and a thick fibrous capsule (p>0.05). After 30, 60, and 90 days, mild inflammation, and a thin fibrous capsule were observed in all groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: All materials had structures positive for von Kossa and birefringent to polarized light. CER epoxy resin showed biocompatibility and biomineralization similar to CER water and MTA.
Abstract The present study aimed at evaluating the cytotoxic effects of a novel cement called CER on periodontal fibroblast-like cells of mice (MDPL-20), in comparison with different formulations of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA), by means of the cell viability test (MTT) and cell morphology analysis. Thirty-two round-shaped samples were fabricated with the following cements: white MTA, white and gray CER and experimental white MTA. The samples were immersed in serum-free culture medium for 24 hours or 7 days (n = 16). The extracts (culture medium + components released from the cements) were applied for 24 hours to previously cultured cells (40.000 cells/cm2) in the wells of 24-well plates. Cells seeded in complete culture medium were used as a negative control. Cell viability was assessed using the MTT assay. Two samples of each cement were used for cell morphology analysis by Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM). The extracts obtained at the 7-day period presented higher cytotoxicity compared with the 24-hour period (p < 0.05). The gray CER obtained at 24 hours presented the highest cytotoxic effect, whereas the experimental white MTA presented the lowest, similar to the control (p > 0.05). However, at the 7-day period, the experimental white MTA presented no significant difference in comparison with the other cements (p > 0.05). At the 7-day period, CER cement presented cytotoxic effects on fibroblast-like cells, similar to different MTA formulations. However, the immersion period in the culture medium influenced the cytotoxicity of the cements, which was greater for CER cement at 24 hours.
Due to the low radiopacity of Sealer 26, iodoform is frequently empirically added to this sealer. Thus, the interference of this procedure with the physicochemical properties of Sealer 26 must be evaluated. Objective: This study evaluated the influence of the addition of iodoform on setting time, flow, solubility, pH, and calcium release of an epoxy-based sealer. Material and Methods: The control group was pure Sealer 26, and the experimental groups were Sealer 26 added with 1.1 g, 0.55 g or 0.275 g of iodoform. Setting time evaluation was performed in accordance with the ASTM C266-03 speciflcation. The analysis of flow and solubility was in accordance with the ISO 6876-2001 speciflcation. For the evaluation of pH and calcium ion release, polyethylene tubes were filled with the materials and immersed in flasks with 10 ml of deionized water. After 24 h, 7, 14, 21, 28, and 45 days pH was measured. In 45 days, the calcium released was evaluated with an atomic absorption spectrophotometer. Results: The addition of iodoform increased setting time in comparison with pure sealer (P<0.05). As for flow, solubility, and calcium release, the mixtures presented results similar to pure sealer (p>0.05). In the 24 h period, the mixture with 1.1 g and 0.55 g of iodoform showed lower pH than pure sealer and than sealer added with 0.275 g of iodoform (P<0.05). Conclusions: The iodoform added to Sealer 26 interferes with its setting time and solubility properties. Further studies are needed to address the clinical signiflcance of this interference.