为了评估实验性混合玻璃基渗透剂的细胞毒性及其对生物膜附着的影响,生长和代谢活动,并将其与树脂基渗透剂图标进行比较。
混合玻璃基材料(EXP)和树脂基渗透剂图标(Icon)的细胞毒性在新固化的直接接触测试(直接垫)和在细胞培养基中保持24小时的材料(直接exmat),和提取试验与材料24小时提取物(提取物)。用MTT法检测L929小鼠成纤维细胞系的细胞活力,根据ISO10993-5:2009。生物膜附着(5小时),生长(24小时和48小时)和乳酸生产(24小时和48小时)的玻璃盘标本涂有EXP或图标,或无涂层(对照),使用微观生物膜模型和阿姆斯特丹主动附着系统进行评估。在指定的时间点,收获生物膜,电镀,并确定CFU计数,而乳酸的产生是用比色法测量的。
在直接接触试验中,EXP降低的细胞活力低于30%的阈值,而在提取物测试中观察到增加的细胞活力。在所有三个测试中,图标显著降低细胞活力。与Icon和对照相比,5小时后附着在EXP表面的细菌显着减少。24小时后,EXP上的生物膜生长显着低于Icon和对照,但这一差异较小,48h后无统计学意义。各组间乳酸产量无差异。
新型混合玻璃基渗透剂似乎具有更好的生物相容性,并且在其表面上积累的细菌比树脂基渗透剂少,这使得它成为一个有吸引力的无树脂替代品。
To assess the cytotoxicity of an experimental hybrid-glass-based infiltrant and its effect on biofilm attachment, growth and metabolic activity, and to compare it to the resin-based infiltrant Icon.
Cytotoxicity of hybrid-glass-based material (EXP) and resin-based infiltrant Icon (Icon) was tested in direct contact tests on freshly cured (direct_mat) and on materials kept for 24 h in cell culture medium (direct_exmat), and extract test with materials 24-h extracts (extract). Cell viability of L929 mouse fibroblast cell line was measured with MTT assay, according to ISO10993-5:2009. Biofilm attachment (5 h), growth (24 h and 48 h) and lactic-acid production (24 h and 48 h) on glass-disk specimens coated with EXP or Icon, or uncoated (control), were assessed using a microcosm biofilm model and Amsterdam Active Attachment system. At indicated time points, biofilms were harvested, plated, and CFU counts were determined, while lactic-acid production was measured colorimetrically.
Cell viability reduction by EXP was below 30%-threshold in direct contact tests, while in extract test an increased cell viability was observed. Icon reduced cell viability substantially in all three tests. Significantly less bacteria attached to the surface of EXP after 5 h compared to Icon and control. Biofilm growth was significantly lower on EXP than on Icon and control after 24 h, but this difference was smaller and statistically insignificant after 48 h. There was no difference in lactic-acid production among groups.
Novel hybrid-glass-based infiltrant seems to have a better biocompatibility and accumulates on its surface less bacteria than resin-based infiltrant, which makes it an attractive resin-free alternative.