ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2015
Cytotoxicity of glass ionomer cements containing silver nanoparticles.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- The antibiofilm effect and mechanism of silver nanowire-modified glass ionomer cement against multi-species oral biofilm.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effect of Nanohydroxyapatite and Silver Nanoparticle Incorporation on the Flexural Strength of Resin Composites.BioMed research international · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Applications of Antioxidants in Dental Procedures.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Incorporation of Nanomaterials in Glass Ionomer Cements-Recent Developments and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Antimicrobial Efficacy of Glass Ionomer Cement in Incorporation with BiogenicMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Effect of Nanostructures on the Properties of Glass Ionomer Dental Restoratives/Cements: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Applications of Silver Nanoparticles in Dentistry: Advances and Technological Innovation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Mechanical and dentin bond strength properties of the nanosilver enriched glass ionomer cement.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2019Article
- Article
- Antibacterial activity of fig leaf (Veterinary world · 2018Article
- Citotoxicity evaluation of three dental adhesives on vero cellsJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2017Article
- Novel Nanotechnology of TiOInternational journal of biomaterials · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSome studies have investigated the possibility of incorporating silver nanoparticles (NAg) into dental materials to improve their antibacterial properties. However, the potential toxic effect of this material on pulp cells should be investigated in order to avoid additional damage to the pulp tissue. This study evaluated the cytotoxicity of conventional and resin-modified glass ionomer cements (GIC) with and without addition of NAg. MATERIAL AND
methodsNAg were added to the materials at two different concentrations by weight: 0.1% and 0.2%. Specimens with standardized dimensions were prepared, immersed in 400 µL of culture medium and incubated at 37°C and 5% CO2 for 48 h to prepare GIC liquid extracts, which were then incubated in contact with cells for 48 h. Culture medium and 0.78% NAg solution were used as negative and positive controls, respectively. Cell viability was determined by MTT and Trypan Blue assays. ANOVA and the Tukey test (α=0.05) were used for statistical analyses.
resultsBoth tests revealed a significant decrease in cell viability in all groups of resin modified cements (p<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between groups with and without NAg (p>0.05). The differences in cell viability between any group of conventional GIC and the negative control were not statistically significant (p>0.05).
conclusionsNAg did not affect the cytotoxicity of the GIC under evaluation. KEY WORDS: Glass ionomer cements, totoxicity, cell culture techniques, nanotechnology, metal nanoparticles.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.