Avaliação da biocompatibilidade, potencial bioativo, alteração volumétrica e interface dentina/material de novos cimentos reparadores e obturadores biocerâmicos
Carregando...
Data
2022-03-22
Autores
Inada, Rafaela Nanami Handa
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
Materiais biocerâmicos são desenvolvidos para utilização como cimentos reparadores e para obturação de canais radiculares. Publicação 1: Avaliação da biocompatibilidade, potencial bioativo, porosidade e interface dentina/material dos cimentos: Bio-C Sealer (BIOC), Sealer Plus BC (SP), TotalFill BC Sealer (TF) em comparação com AH Plus (AHP). A resposta tecidual no subcutâneo de ratos foi avaliada por meio da implantação de tubos de dentina humana com cimentos e tubos vazios (grupo controle-GC) por 7, 15, 30 e 60 dias. Cortes histológicos foram corados com hematoxilina e eosina (HE) para análise de espessura de cápsula e densidade numérica de células inflamatórias/mm2(CIs). Interleucina-6 (IL-6) e osteocalcina (OCN) também foram avaliadas. von Kossa foi realizado para identificação de depósitos de cálcio. Porosidade e interface dentina/material foram analisados por meio de micro tomografia computadorizada (Micro-CT). Os dados foram submetidos aos testes ANOVA e Tukey, com significância de 5%. Em todos os grupos, a espessura de cápsula diminuiu com o decorrer do tempo. AHP exibiu mais CIs e células IL-6-imunopositivas comparado com outros cimentos (P <0,05). Aos 7 dias, o BIOC mostrou mais CIs e células IL-6-imunopositivas em comparação com SP e TF (P <0,05). Aos 15 e 30 dias, nenhuma diferença significativa para CIs e células IL-6-imunopositivas foram detectadas entre SP e TF (P> 0,05). BIOC, SP, TF e GC não apresentaram diferenças significativas (P> 0,05) após 60 dias. Estruturas von Kossa-positivas e birrefringentes foram observadas ao redor de todos os materiais. BIOC, SP e TF exibiram células OCN- imunopositivas em todos os períodos. BIOC apresentou maior porosidade que SP e TF (P<0,05). BIOC, SP, TF e AHP apresentaram similar porcentagem de espaços vazios na interface (P>0,05). Conclui-se que BIOC, SP, TF são biocompatíveis e apresentam bioatividade, e vazios de interface similar ao AHP. Publicação 2: Avaliação da biocompatibilidade, potencial bioativo, porosidade e interface dentina/material de materiais biocerâmicos reparadores: Bio-C Repair (BIOC-R) e MTA repair HP (MTAHP) em comparação ao cimento à base de óxido de zinco e eugenol (IRM). A avaliação da biocompatibilidade e potencial bioativo foram realizadas por meio da implantação de tubos de dentina preenchidos com os materiais e tubos vazios como grupo controle (GC). Após 7, 15, 30 e 60 dias, os tubos e tecidos adjacentes foram removidos para mensuração da capsula, contagem das células inflamatórias/mm2(CIs), detecção das células IL-6 e OCN imunopositivas e von Kossa para identificação de depósitos de cálcio. Análise de micro-CT foi realizada para avaliação da porosidade e interface. Os dados foram submetidos aos testes ANOVA e Tukey, com significância de 5%. As cápsulas de IRM apresentaram maior espessura, CIs e células IL-6- imunopositivas, aos 7 e 15 dias (P<0,05). As cápsulas de BIOC-R exibiram maior espessura e CIs do que MTAHP em 7 dias (P<0,05) e mais células IL-6 -imunopositivas em 7 e 15 dias (P<0,05). Aos 30 e 60 dias, não foram observadas diferenças significativas no número de CIs, espessura da cápsula e número de células IL-6- imunopositivas entre os grupos (P>0,05). Células OCN-imunopositivas, von Kossa positivo e estruturas birrefringentes foram observadas apenas em BIOC-R e MTAHP. BIOC-R e IRM apresentaram baixa porosidade e vazios (P>0,05). O MTAHP apresentou maior porosidade e vazios na interface (P<0,05). Conclui-se que BIOC-R, MTAHP e IRM são materiais biocompatíveis, porém apenas BIOC-R e MTAHP possuem potencial bioativo. MTAHP apresentou maior porosidade e presença de vazios na interface.
Bioceramic materials are developed for use as root repair material and root canal fillings. Publication 1: Evaluation of biocompatibility, bioactive potential, porosity and dentin/material interface of cements: Bio-C Sealer (BIOC), Sealer Plus BC (SP), TotalFill BC Sealer (TF) compared to AH Plus (AHP). The subcutaneous tissue response of rats was evaluated by implanting human dentin tubes with cements and empty tubes (control group-GC) for 7, 15, 30 and 60 days. Histological sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (HE) for analysis of capsule thickness and numerical density of inflammatory cells/mm2 (ICs). Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and osteocalcin (OCN) were also evaluated. von Kossa was performed to identify calcium deposits. Porosity and dentin/material interface were analyzed using micro computed tomography (micro-CT). Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey tests, with a significance of 5%. In all groups, capsule thickness decreased over time. AHP exhibited more ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells compared to other cements (P < 0.05). At 7 days, BIOC showed more ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells compared to SP and TF (P < 0.05). At 15 and 30 days, no significant differences for ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells were detected between SP and TF (P>0.05). BIOC, SP, TF and GC showed no significant differences (P>0.05) after 60 days. von Kossa-positive and birefringent structures were observed around all materials. BIOC, SP and TF exhibited OCN-immunopositive cells in all periods. BIOC showed higher porosity than SP and TF (P<0.05). BIOC, SP, TF and AHP showed similar percentage of voids at the interface (P>0.05). It is concluded that BIOC, SP and TF are biocompatible and present bioactivity, and interface voids similar to AHP. Publication 2: Assessment of biocompatibility, bioactive potential, porosity and dentin/material interface of repairing bioceramic materials: Bio-C Repair (BIOC-R) and MTA repair HP (MTAHP) compared to zinc oxide-eugenol-based cement (IRM). The evaluation of biocompatibility and bioactivity were performed by implanting dentin tubes filled with the materials and empty tubes as a control group (GC). After 7, 15, 30 and 60 days, the tubes and adjacent tissues were removed to measure the capsule, count inflammatory cells/mm2 (ICs), detect immunopositive IL-6 and OCN cells, and von Kossa to identify calcium deposits. Micro-CT analysis was performed to evaluate porosity and interface. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey tests, with a significance of 5%. The IRM capsules showed greater thickness, ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells at 7 and 15 days (P<0.05). BIOC-R capsules exhibited greater thickness and ICs than MTAHP at 7 days (P<0.05) and more IL-6 -immunopositive cells at 7 and 15 days (P<0.05). At 30 and 60 days, no significant differences were observed in the number of ICs, capsule thickness and number of IL-6-immunopositive cells between groups (P>0.05). OCN-immunopositive, von Kossa positive cells and birefringent structures were observed only in BIOC-R and MTAHP. BIOC-R and IRM showed low porosity and voids (P>0.05). MTAHP showed higher porosity and voids at the interface (P<0.05). It is concluded that BIOC-R, MTAHP and IRM are biocompatible materials. However, just BIOC-R and MTAHP have bioactive potential. MTAHP showed higher porosity and presence of voids at the interface.
Bioceramic materials are developed for use as root repair material and root canal fillings. Publication 1: Evaluation of biocompatibility, bioactive potential, porosity and dentin/material interface of cements: Bio-C Sealer (BIOC), Sealer Plus BC (SP), TotalFill BC Sealer (TF) compared to AH Plus (AHP). The subcutaneous tissue response of rats was evaluated by implanting human dentin tubes with cements and empty tubes (control group-GC) for 7, 15, 30 and 60 days. Histological sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (HE) for analysis of capsule thickness and numerical density of inflammatory cells/mm2 (ICs). Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and osteocalcin (OCN) were also evaluated. von Kossa was performed to identify calcium deposits. Porosity and dentin/material interface were analyzed using micro computed tomography (micro-CT). Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey tests, with a significance of 5%. In all groups, capsule thickness decreased over time. AHP exhibited more ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells compared to other cements (P < 0.05). At 7 days, BIOC showed more ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells compared to SP and TF (P < 0.05). At 15 and 30 days, no significant differences for ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells were detected between SP and TF (P>0.05). BIOC, SP, TF and GC showed no significant differences (P>0.05) after 60 days. von Kossa-positive and birefringent structures were observed around all materials. BIOC, SP and TF exhibited OCN-immunopositive cells in all periods. BIOC showed higher porosity than SP and TF (P<0.05). BIOC, SP, TF and AHP showed similar percentage of voids at the interface (P>0.05). It is concluded that BIOC, SP and TF are biocompatible and present bioactivity, and interface voids similar to AHP. Publication 2: Assessment of biocompatibility, bioactive potential, porosity and dentin/material interface of repairing bioceramic materials: Bio-C Repair (BIOC-R) and MTA repair HP (MTAHP) compared to zinc oxide-eugenol-based cement (IRM). The evaluation of biocompatibility and bioactivity were performed by implanting dentin tubes filled with the materials and empty tubes as a control group (GC). After 7, 15, 30 and 60 days, the tubes and adjacent tissues were removed to measure the capsule, count inflammatory cells/mm2 (ICs), detect immunopositive IL-6 and OCN cells, and von Kossa to identify calcium deposits. Micro-CT analysis was performed to evaluate porosity and interface. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey tests, with a significance of 5%. The IRM capsules showed greater thickness, ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells at 7 and 15 days (P<0.05). BIOC-R capsules exhibited greater thickness and ICs than MTAHP at 7 days (P<0.05) and more IL-6 -immunopositive cells at 7 and 15 days (P<0.05). At 30 and 60 days, no significant differences were observed in the number of ICs, capsule thickness and number of IL-6-immunopositive cells between groups (P>0.05). OCN-immunopositive, von Kossa positive cells and birefringent structures were observed only in BIOC-R and MTAHP. BIOC-R and IRM showed low porosity and voids (P>0.05). MTAHP showed higher porosity and voids at the interface (P<0.05). It is concluded that BIOC-R, MTAHP and IRM are biocompatible materials. However, just BIOC-R and MTAHP have bioactive potential. MTAHP showed higher porosity and presence of voids at the interface.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Materiais Biocompatíveis, Ratos, Microtomografia por Raio-X, Endodontia, Biocompatible Materials, Rats, X-Ray Microtomography, Endodontics