THE EVALUATION OF DENTAL MATERIALS BIOCOMPATIBILITY

Abstract

-

Keywords

• -

DENTAL MATERYALLERDE BIYOUYUMLULUK DEĞERLENDIRMELERI

Abstract

Diş hekimliği uygulamalarında farklı içerik ve özelliklere sahip çok çeşitli materyaller üretilmiş ve klinik kullanıma sunulmuştur. Bu materyallerin çoğu uygulandıklarında diş dokuları, yumuşak doku ve sıvılarla (tükürük, diş eti oluğu sıvısı) temas etmektedir. Böylece yeni bir materyal seçiminde, mekanik ve fiziksel özelliklerin yanında biyolojik özelliklerde göz önüne alınmaktadır. Bir materyalin biyouyumluluğunu saptamak için günümüzde çeşitli testler özelliklerinin kullanılmaktadır

Keywords

• Anahtar Dental Materyal

References

1. Schmalz G, Biocompatibility of Dental Materials.1st ed. Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; Springer:2009. p.1-10
2. Wataha JC. Principles of biocompatibility for dental practitioners. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;86(2):203–9.
3. Hanks CT, Wataha JC, Sun Z. In vitro models of biocompatibility: ;12:186–193. Schmalz Biocompatibility of Dental Materials. 1st ed. Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; Springer:2009. p.13-40
4. Powers JM, Sakaguchi RL. Craig's restorative dental materials. 12th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier; 2006. p.97-125
5. R. Ian Freshney Culture of Animal Cells: A Manual of Basic Technique, Fifth Edition,. Haboken; John Wiley & Sons: 2005.p.1-216
6. Candan Ç., Bilgiç A., Klinik Viroloji Labaratuvarında Uzmanlık Öğrencisine Verilen Hücre Kültürü Eğitim Programı: Bir Model, İnfeksiyon Dergisi (Turkish Journal of Infection) 2006; 20 (3): 231-241
7. Helgason CD, Miller CL. Methods in moleculer biology. Press:2005. p. 1-12
8. Murray PE, García Godoy C, García Godoy F.How is the evaluated? Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. ;12(3):E258-66. review. Dent Mater. G, Dorthe Arenholt Bindslev. Third edition. Tatowa; Humana biocompatibilty of dental biomaterials Aldridge WN. The biochemical principles of toxicology. Nicholson JW.The Chemistry of Medical and Dental Materials. Cambridge; The Royal Society of Chemistry: 2002. p.186-195

9. ISO 7405.Dentistry -- Preclinical evaluation of biocompatibility of medical devices used in dentistry -- Test methods for dental materials.
10. ISO 10993-5. Biological evaluation of medical devices -- Part 5: Tests for in vitro cytotoxicity. Moharamzadeh K, Brook
11. Biocompatibility of Resin-based Dental Materials. Materials. 2009; 2(2): 514-548 IM, Noort RV.
12. Polyzois, GL. In vitro evaluation of dental materials. Clin Mater. 1994, 16, 21-60
13. Tang AT, Li J, Ekstrand J, Liu Y.Cytotoxicity tests of in situ polymerized resins: methodological comparisons and introduction of a tissue culture insert as a testing device.J Biomed Mater Res. ;45(3):214-22
14. Schmalz, G. The agar overlay method. Int. Endod. J. 1988. 21: 59-66.
15. Wennberg A, Hasselgren G, Tronstad L. A method for toxicity screening of biomaterials using cells cultured on Millipore filters. J Biomed Mater Res ;13:109-20. Outhwaite WC, McKenzie DM, Pashley DH. A versatile split-chamber device for studying dentin permeability. J Dent Res 1974;53(6):1503.
16. Tyas MJ. A method for the in vitro toxicity testing of dental restorative materials. J Dent Res ;56: 1285–1290
17. Hume WR. A new technique for screening chemical toxicity to the pulp from dental restorative materials and procedures. J Dent Res 1985; 64: –1325
18. Schmalz G, Garhammer P, Schweiki H. A commercially available cell culture device modified for dentin barrier tests. J Endod 1996;22:249–252
19. Schmalz G., Hiller K., Nunez L., Stoll J., Weis K. Permeability Characteristics of Bovine and Human Dentin under Different Pretreatment Conditions. J Endod 2001;27:23–30
20. R. Ian Freshney Culture of Animal Cells: A Manual of Basic Technique, Fifth Edition, John Wiley & Sons 2005, Inc., p:359-373
21. Jenkins N. Methods in Biotechnology, Volume 8: Animal cell biotechnology Totawa NJ, Humana Press p:239-252
22. Babich H, Reisbaum AG, Zuckerbraun HL. In Vitro Response of Human Gingival Epithelial S-G Cells to Resveratrol, Toxicol Letter 2000; 114: 143–53
23. Aksoy Y. Antioksidan Mekanizmada Glutatyonun Rolü. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci 2002;22(4):442
24. Lefeuvre M, Amjaad W, Goldberg M, Stanislawski L. TEGDMA induces mitochondrial damage and oxidative stress in human gingival fibroblasts. Biomaterials 2005;26:5130–5137
25. Lefeuvre M, Bourd K, Loriot MA, Goldberg M, Beaune P, Perianin A. TEGDMA modulates glutathionetransferase P1 activity in gingival fibroblasts. J Dent Res 2004;83:914–9.
26. Deneke SM, Fanburg BL. Regulation of cellular glutathione. Am J Physiol 1989; 257: L163-L173
27. Mantellini MG, Botero TM, Yaman P, Dennison JB, Hanks CT, Nör JE. Adhesive resin induces apoptosis and cell-cycle arrest of pulp cells. J Dent Res 2003; 82: 592–596
28. Maron, D.M., Ames, B.N.: Revised method for the Salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutat Res 1983; : 173–215
29. Schweikl, H., Schmalz, G.: Triethylene glycol dimethacrylate induceslarge deletions in the hprt gene of V79 cells. Mutat Res 1999: 438: 71–78.
30. Soderholm KJ, Mariotti A. BIS-GMA-based resins in dentistry: Are they safe? Am Dent Assoc 1999;130: –209 Schmalz G,
31. Biocompatibility of dental Materials. 1st ed. Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; Springer:2009. P.99-130
32. Zorba YO., Yıldız M. Adeziv restoratif materyallerde biyouyumluluk testleri ve kriterleri. Atatürk Üniv. Di_ Hek. Fak. Derg. 2007: ;Suppl.: 2, S: 15-21
33. Schmalz G. The biocompatiblity of non-amalgam dental materials. filling Eur J Oral Sci ;106:696-706. Geurtsen W. Biocompatiblity of resin-modified filling materials. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med ;11:333-355. Frankild, S., Volund, A., Wahlberg, J.E., Andersen, K.E.: Comparison of the sensitivities of the Buehler test and the guinea pig maximization test for predictive testing of contact allergy. Acta Derm Venereol 2000; 80: 256–262