Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Aim: The purpose of this study was to investigate the cytotoxicity of nanohybrid mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) in comparison with calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) cement and MTA-Angelus, using human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs). Materials and Methods: Nine disc-shaped specimens of each material (in 2 set stat: A, set for 24 h; B, set for 30 min; and C, fresh stat) were prepared. HGFs were exposed to tested materials' extracts or control media. Cytotoxicity testing was performed using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazoliumbromide assay in two time intervals. Statistical Analysis: Results were evaluated by one-way ANOVA and t-test. Statistical significance was set at P< 0.05. Results: CEM cement demonstrated favorable cell viability values when completely set (24 h set MTA = 24 h set CEM) at both time intervals. Interestingly, 24 h after incubation, CEM in Groups B and C demonstrated higher cell viability values than MTA (P < 0.05). However, after 72 h of incubation, these groups of CEM and MTA showed equal cell viability. All samples of nanohybrid MTA had slight cytotoxic effects after 24 h of incubation, and moderate cytotoxic effects after 72 h of incubation. Conclusion: Set CEM and set MTA-Angelus exerted similar, favorable effects on cell viability. However, within the limitations of this in vitro study, the results suggest that nanohybrid MTA could not be recommended as a material of choice for cervical root resorption.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tabatabaei et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: