ArticleClinical oral investigations2017
Novel endodontic sealers induce cell cytotoxicity and apoptosis in a dose-dependent behavior and favorable response in mice subcutaneous tissue.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biocompatibility of three different root canal sealers, experimental study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Subcutaneous Tissue Response to Adseal and Sure-Seal Root Sealers in Rats: a Histopathological Study.Maedica · 2022Article
- Cytotoxicity and Oxidative Stress Induction by Root Canal Sealers in Human Periodontal Ligament Fibroblasts: An in vitro Study.Iranian endodontic journal · 2021Article
- Cytotoxicity and release ions of endodontic sealers incorporated with a silver and vanadium base nanomaterial.Odontology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of the present study is to evaluate the in vitro cytotoxicity and in vivo biocompatibility of two novel endodontic sealers: RealSeal XT1 and Sealapex Xpress on the subcutaneous connective tissue of mice. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe cytotoxicity was assessed by cell viability using the MTT assay (one-way ANOVA), trypan blue test (Mann-Whitney) and cell apoptosis by flow cytometer. For the subcutaneous study, polyethylene tubes filled with the sealers were implanted in 70 BALB/c mice: 6 experimental groups (n = 10/group) and 2 control groups with empty tubes (n = 5/group). At the end of experimental periods (7, 21, and 63 days), the tissue was removed and histotechnically processed. Angioblastic proliferation and edema (Fisher's exact test) were evaluated, besides thickness measurement (μm) of the reactionary granulomatous tissue and neutrophil counts (Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's post test; Mann-Whitney) (α = 0.05).
resultsMTT assay, trypan blue, and analysis of apoptotic cells showed a dose-dependent direct effect: the more diluted the sealer, the less cytotoxic. Regarding the angioblastic proliferation and edema, difference between the sealers at 7 and 63 days occurred (p < 0.05). Both endodontic sealers initially promoted perimaterial tissue reaction as a foreign body granuloma and thus stimulated favorable tissue responses.
conclusionsBoth sealers showed a dose-dependent effect and promoted satisfactory subcutaneous tissue response; the sealer Sealapex Xpress was less cytotoxic and more biocompatible than RealSeal XT. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The step of root canal filling during endodontic treatment is highly important for the preservation of the periapical tissue integrity. Subcutaneous reaction to endodontic sealers enables scientific basis for clinical use.
Indexed as
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.