Research Article

Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD/CAM Blocks

Volume: 10 Number: 2 August 21, 2023
TR EN

Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD/CAM Blocks

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study is to determine the cytotoxic effects of Computer Aided Design (CAD) and Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM) blocks produced by different companies on human peripheral blood lymphocytes by MTT assay. Methods: Six different CAD/CAM materials were investigated: feldspar ceramic VM (Vitablocks Mark II ), resin nano-ceramic LU (Lava Ultimate), hybrid ceramic C (Cerasmart), leucite-reinforced ceramic LRF (GC LRF), zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate ceramic VS (Vita Suprinity), polymer-infiltrated ceramic-network VE (Vita Enamic). A total of 36 disc-shaped samples (Ø: 5 mm; h: 2 mm) were prepared from commercial blanks and blocks. Cell proliferation and cytotoxicity were assessed at 24h and 48h using MTT assay. The data were statistically evaluated with the Two-way ANOVA test (p < 0.05). Results: MTT viability data at 24 h showed that group VM and LU blocks were mildly cytotoxic, but there was no statistically significant difference when compared with other groups (p>0.05). It was determined that all blocks caused cell proliferation after 48 hours of exposure (p>0.05). It has been shown that all blocks whose cytotoxic effects were investigated did not cause any toxic effects (except VM and LU for 24 h) at different application times (24 h and 48 h). Conclusion: Based on the results obtained and the limitations of the current in vitro study, the tested materials were not cytotoxic. Only VM and LU caused negligible cytotoxicity at 24-hour exposure.

Keywords

References

  1. [1] Pagano S, Lombardo G, Caponi S, Costanzi E, Di Michele A, Bruscoli S, et al. Bio-mechanical characterization of a CAD/CAM PMMA resin for digital removable prostheses. Dent Mater. 2021;37(3):e118-e130. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2020.11.003
  2. [2] Ramanathan M, Panneerselvam E, Krishna Kumar Raja VB. 3D planning in mandibular fractures using CAD/CAM surgical splints - A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2020;48(4):405-412. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2020.02.004
  3. [3] Goujat A, Abouelleil H, Colon P, Jeannin C, Pradelle N, SeuxD, et al. Marginal and internal fit of CAD-CAM inlay/onlay restorations: A systematic review of in vitro studies. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(4):590-597.e3. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.06.006
  4. [4] Zarone F, Russo S, Sorrentino R. From porcelain-fused-to-metal to zirconia: clinical and experimental considerations. Dent Mater. 2011;27(1):83-96. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.024
  5. [5] Guess PC, Selz CF, Steinhart YN, Stampf S, Strub JR. Prospective clinical split-mouth study of pressed and CAD/CAM all-ceramic partial-coverage restorations: 7-year results. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26(1):21-25. doi:10.11607/ijp.3043
  6. [6] Aktas G, Yerlikaya H, Akca K. Mechanical Failure of Endocrowns Manufactured with Different Ceramic Materials: An In Vitro Biomechanical Study. J Prosthodont. 2018;27(4):340-346. doi:10.1111/jopr.12499
  7. [7] Alamoush RA, Kushnerev E, Yates JM, Satterthwaite JD, Silikas N. Response of two gingival cell lines to CAD/CAM composite blocks. Dent Mater. 2020;36(9):1214-1225. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2020.05.014
  8. [8] Atay A, Gürdal I, Bozok Çetıntas V, Üşümez A, Cal E. Effects of New Generation All-Ceramic and Provisional Materials on Fibroblast Cells. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(1):e383-e394. doi:10.1111/jopr.12915

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Dentistry

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

August 21, 2023

Submission Date

November 3, 2022

Acceptance Date

March 23, 2023

Published in Issue

Year 2023 Volume: 10 Number: 2

APA
Coşkun, F. Ö., Akbaba, G. B., Atala, M. H., & Özüdoğru, S. (2023). Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD/CAM Blocks. Selcuk Dental Journal, 10(2), 462-467. https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1199010
AMA
1.Coşkun FÖ, Akbaba GB, Atala MH, Özüdoğru S. Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD/CAM Blocks. Selcuk Dent J. 2023;10(2):462-467. doi:10.15311/selcukdentj.1199010
Chicago
Coşkun, Fikret Özgür, Giray Buğra Akbaba, Mustafa Hayati Atala, and Semanur Özüdoğru. 2023. “Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD CAM Blocks”. Selcuk Dental Journal 10 (2): 462-67. https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1199010.
EndNote
Coşkun FÖ, Akbaba GB, Atala MH, Özüdoğru S (August 1, 2023) Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD/CAM Blocks. Selcuk Dental Journal 10 2 462–467.
IEEE
[1]F. Ö. Coşkun, G. B. Akbaba, M. H. Atala, and S. Özüdoğru, “Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD/CAM Blocks”, Selcuk Dent J, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 462–467, Aug. 2023, doi: 10.15311/selcukdentj.1199010.
ISNAD
Coşkun, Fikret Özgür - Akbaba, Giray Buğra - Atala, Mustafa Hayati - Özüdoğru, Semanur. “Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD CAM Blocks”. Selcuk Dental Journal 10/2 (August 1, 2023): 462-467. https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.1199010.
JAMA
1.Coşkun FÖ, Akbaba GB, Atala MH, Özüdoğru S. Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD/CAM Blocks. Selcuk Dent J. 2023;10:462–467.
MLA
Coşkun, Fikret Özgür, et al. “Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD CAM Blocks”. Selcuk Dental Journal, vol. 10, no. 2, Aug. 2023, pp. 462-7, doi:10.15311/selcukdentj.1199010.
Vancouver
1.Fikret Özgür Coşkun, Giray Buğra Akbaba, Mustafa Hayati Atala, Semanur Özüdoğru. Cytotoxicity Evaluation of Different Types of CAD/CAM Blocks. Selcuk Dent J. 2023 Aug. 1;10(2):462-7. doi:10.15311/selcukdentj.1199010