Aim To compare the bioactivity of Biodentine ( BIO , Septodont), MTA Plus ( MTA P, Avalon) and calcium silicate experimental cement ( CSC ) with resin ( CSCR ) associated with zirconium ( CSCR ZrO 2 ) or niobium ( CSCR Nb 2 O 5 ) oxide as radiopacifiers. Methodology According to the relevance of osteoblastic cell response for mineralized tissue repair, human osteoblastic cells (Saos‐2) were exposed to test materials and assessed for viability ( MTT ), cell proliferation, gene expression of alkaline phosphatase ( ALP ) osteogenic marker by real‐time PCR (RT‐qPCR), ALP activity assay and alizarin red staining ( ARS ) to detect mineralization nodule deposition in osteogenic medium. Unexposed cells acted as the control group (C). Statistical analysis was carried out using ANOVA and the Bonferroni post‐test ( P < 0.05). Results All tested cements showed dose‐dependent responses in cell viability (MTT). Exposed cells revealed good viability (80–130% compared to the control group) in the highest dilutions of all types of cement. MTA P, BIO and CSCR ZrO 2 significantly increased the velocity of cell proliferation after three days of cell exposure in the wound‐healing assay ( P < 0.05), which corroborated MTT data. On day 3, the ALP transcript level increased, especially to CSCR Nb 2 O 5 ( P < 0.05). All cements exhibited suitable ALP enzyme activity, highlighting the 7‐day period of cell exposure. ARS , CSCR Nb 2 O 5 , revealed a significant potential to induce mineralization in vitro . Conclusions All materials had suitable biocompatibility and bioactivity. The MTA P, BIO and CSCR ZrO 2 groups had the highest viability rates and velocity of proliferation whilst the CSCR Nb 2 O 5 group produced more mineralized nodules.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gomes-Cornélio et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: