Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41193923›Full record

ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2025

A combined in-silico and in-vitro evaluation of cyanoacrylate-based dental materials as an adhesive for applications in prosthodontics: molecular docking and cytocompatibility analysis.

Divyansh Sinha, Subhabrata Maiti, Suresh Venugopalan, Sathan Raj Natarajan, Artak Heboyan, Selvaraj Jayaraman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Divyansh SinhaDepartment of Prosthodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, 600077, Tamil Nadu, India.
Subhabrata MaitiDepartment of Prosthodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, 600077, Tamil Nadu, India. drsubhoprostho@gmail.com.
Suresh VenugopalanDepartment of Prosthodontics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, 600077, Tamil Nadu, India.
Sathan Raj NatarajanCentre of Molecular Medicine and Diagnostics (COMManD), Department of Biochemistry, Saveetha Dental College & Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical & Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, 600077, Tamil Nadu, India.
Artak HeboyanDepartment of Research Analytics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India. a_heboyan@farabi.tums.ac.ir.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8329-3205
Selvaraj JayaramanCentre of Molecular Medicine and Diagnostics (COMManD), Department of Biochemistry, Saveetha Dental College & Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical & Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, 600077, Tamil Nadu, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study combined in-silico molecular docking with in-vitro cytocompatibility testing to evaluate the safety of cyanoacrylate adhesives. Molecular docking was performed for four cyanoacrylate monomers (ethyl, n-butyl, isoamyl, and 2-octyl) against key proteins associated with inflammation (IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α, CRP), bone metabolism (BMP4), and tissue repair (NOTCH2, fibronectin). Docking scores and binding residues were analyzed using PyRx and BIOVIA Discovery Studio. Degradation products (formaldehyde, ethyl-2-cyanoacetate) were also evaluated. In-vitro cytocompatibility of isoamyl 2-cyanoacrylate was assessed on 3T3-L1 fibroblasts using MTT and LDH assays at concentrations of 25-200 μg/mL over 24 and 48 h. Docking scores ranged from -4 to -6 kcal/mol, suggesting weak to moderate binding and low likelihood of interference with protein function. Longer-chain cyanoacrylates showed weaker binding compared to ethyl cyanoacrylate, indicating more favorable stability and lower toxicity. Degradation products demonstrated reduced binding, though ethyl-2-cyanoacetate showed comparatively higher affinities than formaldehyde. In-vitro assays revealed cell viabilities above the ISO 10993-5 threshold at clinically relevant concentrations, with mild cytotoxicity only at higher concentrations and longer exposures. The combined findings provide a molecular and cellular basis for their clinical use, suggesting that longer-chain cyanoacrylates are likely safer adhesives for denture applications.

Indexed as

Biocompatible materialsComplete dentureCyanoacrylatesCytotoxicityMolecular docking

Identifiers

PMID41193923
PMCPMC12589763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.