Research Article

The Effects of Various Dental Restorative Materials on Neuroblastoma Cells

Volume: 2 Number: 2 October 25, 2023
EN

The Effects of Various Dental Restorative Materials on Neuroblastoma Cells

Abstract

Introduction: Our aim was to investigate the effects of restorative materials such as composite, compomer and glass ionomer, which are frequently used in dentistry, on SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells by evaluating oxidative stress parameters, pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines and apoptosis markers. Materials and Method: Equa Forte, Dyract AP, Tokuyama Estelite P Quick, Omnichroma, Filtek Z250, SureFil SDR flow restorative materials were used in our study. SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells were cultured with restorative materials. Immunohistochemical staining was performed on the experimental groups with Anti-Bax and Anti-Caspase 9 antibodies. Then, ELISA technique was used to detect TNF-alpha, TGF-beta, IL-1-beta, IL-6, IL-10, LPO and CAT levels. One-way ANOVA analysis was used in the statistical evaluation of the obtained results (p<0.05). Results: In the light of the obtained data, it was observed that the dental filling materials were effective in increasing TGF-beta, IL-10, LPO and CAT levels, and decreasing TNF-alpha, IL-1-beta and IL-6 levels. Histological micrographs also supported the issues. When the H-score levels in the Caspase 9 labeled micrographs were evaluated, the mean of the control group was lower than the mean of the experimental groups. Conclusion: Our study shows that biocompatibility cannot be explained by looking at a single cause. Biocompatibility varies with material content, residual monomer amount and solubility. Although all experimental groups have cytotoxic effects, the least effect is seen in the glass ionomer group.

Keywords

Dental filling materials , SHSY5Y , neuroblastoma , inflammation , apoptosis

References

  1. 1. Rueggeberg FA. From vulcanite to vinyl, a history of resins in restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 2002, 87, 364–379.
  2. 2. Modena KC, Casas-Apayco LC, Atta MT, Costa CA, Hebling J, Sipert CR, Navarro MF, Santos CF. Cytotoxicity and biocompatibility of direct and indirect pulp capping materials. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009, 17(6), 544-54.
  3. 3. Schmalz G, Arenholt-Bindslev D. Biocompatibility of dental materials (Vol. 1). Berlin: 2009, Springer.
  4. 4. Schmalz G, Groppl F, Hiller KA, Wales KM. Three- dimensional human cell cultures for cytotoxicity testing of dental filling materials. Acta stomatologica Croatica. 2014, 48(2), 99.
  5. 5. Pelka M, Danzl C, Distler W, Petschelt A. A new screening test for toxicity testing of dental materials. J Dent, 2000, 28(5), 341-345.
  6. 6. Schweikl H, Hiller KA, Bolay C, Kreissl M, Kreismann W, Nusser A, Steinhauser S, Weiczork J, Vasold R, Schmalz G. Cytotoxic and mutagenic effects of dental composite materials. Biomaterials. 2005, 26(14), 1713-1719.
  7. 7. Ortengren U, Wellendorf H, Karlsson S, Ruyter IE. Water sorption and solubility of dental composites and identification of monomers released in an aqueous environment. J Oral Rehab, 2001, 28(12), 1106-1115.
  8. 8. Padbury A, Eber R, Wang HL. Interactions between the gingiva and the margin of restorations. J Clin Periodontol, 2003, 30, 379-385.
  9. 9. Pettini F, Savino M, Corsalini M, Cantore S, Ballini A. Cytogenetic genotoxic investigation in peripheral blood lymphocytes of subjects with dental composite restorative filling materials. J Biol regular Homeost agents. 2015, 29(1), 229-33.
  10. 10. Sakaguchi RL, Douglas WH, Peters MC. Curing light performance and polymerization of composite restorative materials. J Dent, 1992, 20, 183-188.
APA
Bayram, P., Duzyol, M., Düzyol, E., & Aksak Karameşe, S. (2023). The Effects of Various Dental Restorative Materials on Neuroblastoma Cells. Eurasian Journal of Molecular and Biochemical Sciences, 2(2), 14-20. https://izlik.org/JA83PU29KB