Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the biological response of human apical papilla cells to different calcium hydroxide formulations and three tricalcium silicate-based materials. METHODS: Primary cells were obtained from explants of young immature premolars. 20,000 cells adhered for 24 h over discs of Biodentine™, ProRoot®MTA, BioRoot®RCS and calcium hydroxide mixed either with sodium chloride 0.9%w/v or polyethylene glycol and UltraCal® were used to evaluate cell adhesion by scanning electron microscopy and cell viability by MTT assay. RESULTS: Cells adhered to ProRoot®MTA showed an increase of F-actin like protrusions, suggesting bioactivity. Cells adhered to UltraCal® show protrusion such as filopodia. On the contrary, cells adhered to BioRoot®RCS showed no signs of any cellular protrusion. Regarding viability between the materials, we found a higher percentage of viability in cells cultured over discs of Biodentine™ and ProRoot®MTA. CONCLUSION: ProRoot®MTA and Biodentine™ exhibit a better cellular response of human apical papilla cells in vitro conditions compared to BioRoot® and calcium hydroxide diluted in sodium chloride.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garrido et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: