Biological evaluation of enamel sealants in an organotypic model of the human gingiva

Abstract

Objectives

Various sealant materials have been suggested to decrease decalcification during orthodontic treatment. However, only a few in vitro studies on the cytotoxicity of resinous pit and fissure sealants have been published, and to the best of our knowledge no similar studies are available for the enamel sealants used in orthodontics. Therefore, we aimed to characterize the possible adverse effects of enamel sealants, especially on the gingival epithelium.

Methods

Organotypic cultures of the human gingival mucosa were used to assess the possible impact of six enamel sealants. Differentiation and apoptosis were determined by immunofluorescent staining. The pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-1β and IL-6 were quantified by ELISA. Cytotoxicity was measured using MTS assays in monolayer cultures of human gingival fibroblasts. Leaching of monomers from enamel sealants was quantified using HPLC.

Results

The differentiation of the organotypic gingival mucosa remained unaffected. All under-cured and several standard-cured sealants (Light Bond™ Sealant, Light Bond™ Filled Sealant, and L.E.D. Pro Seal ® ) significantly induced apoptosis in the organotypic model. Light Bond™ Sealant, Light Bond™ Filled Sealant, and L.E.D. Pro Seal ® caused a significant induction of pro-inflammatory cytokines. Reducing curing time had an influence on cytotoxicity in monolayer cultures of primary human oral cells. All resin-based sealants leached monomers.

Significance

Enamel sealants might exert adverse effects on the gingival epithelium. Due to the vicinity of the enamel sealant to the gingival epithelium, and the large surface area of applied sealants, these materials should be carefully applied and sufficiently cured.

Introduction

Decalcification of the enamel surface is one of the most common unwanted side effects of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances . The use of various sealant materials has been suggested to decrease decalcification during orthodontic treatment. In particular, filled and unfilled photo-activated resin-based smooth enamel surface sealants and caries infiltrants, as well as different types of varnishes and liners, have all been recommended as non-compliant caries preventive measures .

Dental materials used in the oral cavity are not inert, and almost all materials may release substances. These substances could cause adverse local and/or even systemic effects .

Regarding resin-based dental materials, previous studies have clearly demonstrated that numerous substances such as (co)monomers [e.g. bisphenol-A-diglycidyl dimethacrylate (bis-GMA), urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA), triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA), hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)] or additives [e.g. camphorquinone (CQ), butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT)] can be eluted from these materials into an adjacent liquid phase and may exert cytotoxic effects on human oral cells . In addition, more recent studies have identified toxic metabolic intermediates of composite (co)monomers that might significantly contribute to cytotoxicity . Light-induced resin-based dental materials are cytotoxic before polymerization and directly thereafter, whereas set specimens cause less severe effects . Therefore, due to the amount of possible residual monomer, light-curing time and conversion rates are considered important factors related to cytotoxicity . Also, the filler formulation might affect the degree of cytotoxicity . In addition to light-curing time, conversion rate, and filler formulation, a recent review has highlighted that the release of components from polymerized resin-based dental materials is dependent on the surface area that is exposed to the solvent .

Enamel sealants, applied to the total labial surface of tooth crowns, will expose large surface areas to potential solvents. During application, sealants might even come into direct contact with gingival epithelia and excess material might deposit in the gingival sulcus. However, no comprehensive data are available so far regarding the cytotoxicity of these materials. Hence, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the cytotoxic effects of different commercially available (and commonly used) sealant materials. We used an organotypic co-culture model of the gingival epithelium challenged with sealant-treated enamel slices to evaluate their impact on epithelial differentiation and apoptosis. The levels of the pro-inflammatory cytokines IL1-β and IL-6 were measured in culture supernatants to assess local inflammatory and immune responses. Cell viability assays were performed on human gingival fibroblasts exposed to leachings of sealants in artificial saliva. Finally, leachable monomers from sealants were quantified by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC).

Materials and methods

Sealants

The sealants used in this study are presented in Table 1 .

Table 1
Products used in this study.
Product Category Composition Supplier Curing Etching Lot. No. Abbreviation
L.E.D. Pro Seal ® Composite, filled Hexafunctional urethane acrylate, ethoxylated bisphenol A diacrylate, ethoxylated trimethylolpropane triacrylate, EDMAB, camphorquinone, silica Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, USA 20 s, light 30 s 11834 ProSeal LED
Light Bond™ Filled Sealant Composite, filled Glass filler, hydrofluoride methacrylate, urethane dimethacrylate, triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, USA 20 s, light 30 s 103113 LightBond F
Ultraseal ® XT Plus Clear Composite, filled Diurethane dimethacrylate, bis GMA, 2-dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate, sodium monofluorophosphate, titanium dioxide Ultradent, Utah, USA 20 s, light 15–20 s B6RBP UltraSeal XT
Light Bond™ Sealant Composite, unfilled Bisphenol A diglycidylmethacrylate, triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate, urethane dimethacrylate, tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate, hydrofluoride methacrylate Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, USA 10 s, light 30 s 11892 LightBond UF
Protecto ® CaF2 Nano Silicone Ethylacetate, siliconepolyacrylate, olaflur, nano-fluorapatite, nano-calciumfluoride BonaDent, Frankfurt, Germany 60 s, air None 4201383 Protecto nano
Clinpro™ XT Varnish Glass ionomer Part A (paste): silane treated glass, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate, water, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate, silane treated silica. Part B (liquid): copolymer of acrylic and itaconic acids, water, 2-hydroxyethyl, calcium glycerophosphate 3M Unitek, Seefeld, Germany 20 s, light 15–60 s N178061 ClinProXT
Compositions are according to the manufacturers’ specifications; curing and etching are according to the manufacturers’ instructions.

Cell culture and organotypic co-culture of gingival cells

Gingival tissue and alveolar bone were obtained from patients following extraction of third molars. Informed consent was obtained from volunteers who were undergoing removal of wisdom teeth for medical reasons. The local ethics committee (Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg; 80/94S147/2010) approved harvest of the tissues.

The isolation of gingival cells was performed as described previously . Briefly, gingival tissues were separated into epithelial and connective tissue elements. Epithelial tissue was dissociated using dispase (2.4 U/ml, 37 °C, 30 min). Cells were seeded and subcultured in keratinocyte growth medium (Promo Cell, Heidelberg, Germany) at 37 °C in a humidified 5% CO 2 incubator. Keratinocytes were immortalized using the E6 and E7 genes of human papilloma virus 16 (HPV-16) using recombinant retroviruses .

Gingival fibroblasts were obtained from the remaining connective tissue of explant cultures as described by .

Gingival fibroblasts were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM; Invitrogen, Karlsruhe, Germany) supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (FCS), 2 mM l -glutamine, antibiotics, and antimycotics at 37 °C in a humidified 5% CO 2 incubator. Immortalized gingival keratinocytes were used between passages 14 and 16. Gingival fibroblasts were used between passages 4 and 6 both for the organotypic cultures and for the monolayer cultures used for viability assays.

Organotypic cultures of human gingival cells were established as described by : bovine collagen type I (Life Technologies, Darmstadt, Germany) was polymerized at a concentration of 3 mg/ml in Hanks’ buffered solution (HBS, 10×), gingival fibroblasts were added in FCS at a concentration of 1 × 10 5 cells/ml collagen, and collagen gels were polymerized by neutralization with NaOH (1 N). Collagen gels containing gingival fibroblasts were allowed to polymerize and were immersed in organotypic culture medium (DMEM/Ham’s F-12 1:1 mixture, Life Technologies, Darmstadt, Germany) supplemented with bovine pituitary extract [0.004 mg/ml], epidermal growth factor (EGF; recombinant human) [0.125 ng/ml], insulin (recombinant human) [5 μg/ml], hydrocortisone [0.33 μg/ml], epinephrine [0.39 μg/ml], transferrin, holo (human) [10 μg/ml], and CaCl 2 [0.06 mM]. After 24 h, gingival keratinocytes (7 × 10 5 cells per collagen gel) were seeded on the surface of the collagen gels and allowed to adhere for 24 h. At this stage organotypic cultures were lifted onto metal grids allowing air contact of the upper keratinocyte layer. Organotypic culture medium was changed every second day and the cultures were matured for 21 days.

Preparation of enamel slices and challenge with organotypic cultures of human gingival cells

Enamel slices were prepared from extracted teeth. Teeth were collected after informed consent was obtained from patients who underwent extractions for medical reasons. The local ethics committee (Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg; S-301/2011) approved collection of the teeth. Teeth were cleaned from adherent tissue and stored in artificial saliva (16.1 mM KCl, 14.4 mM NaCl, 1.9 mM KH 2 PO 4 , 1.4 mM CaCl 2 , pH 6.8) to avoid demineralization. Enamel slices (200 μm) were prepared from teeth using an inner diameter saw (Leica, Wetzlar, Germany). Slices were sterilized by autoclaving and stored in sterile artificial saliva at 4 °C until further use. Equal amounts of sealants (10 μl) were applied according to the manufacturers’ recommendations (see Table 1 ). Light curing was performed using an Optilux 501 polymerization lamp (Kerr Corp., Orange, CA, USA); luminescence was routinely tested and mean values were 1000 mW/cm 2 . Curing times were as recommended by the manufacturer. Additionally, to asses the effects of altered curing times light-curing or air-drying times were increased and decreased by 50%, respectively. Sealant-treated enamel slices were challenged with mature organotypic cultures by direct application of the slices on to the epithelial layer of the organotypic cultures for 24 h. Untreated or etched-only slices served as controls.

For the assessment of differentiation and apoptosis by immunofluorescent staining, the organotypic cultures were carefully frozen over liquid nitrogen and embedded in Tissue-Tek (Sakura Finetek, Staufen, Germany). Cryosections (10 μm) were mounted on adhesive slides, air-dried, and fixed with methanol/acetone (1:1) for 10 min at −20 °C and frozen at −80 °C until analyzed.

For the quantification of pro-inflammatory cytokines, culture supernatants were harvested and snap frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80 °C until analysis.

Immunofluorescent staining

Incubation with primary antibodies (anti-CK14, clone LL002, 1:50; anti-involucrin, clone SY5 1:50, both from Abcam, Cambridge, UK); cleaved caspase-3 (Asp175 clone 5A1E 1:600, Cell Signaling Technologies/New England Biolabs, Frankfurt, Germany) was performed overnight at 4 °C. After washing (3 × 10 min in PBS), sections were incubated with fluorochrome-conjugated antibodies (Jackson-ImmunoResearch/Dianova, Hamburg, Germany), for 1 h at room temperature. Sections were mounted in antifade reagent with DAPI (4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole) as a counterstain.

Microphotographs were taken using a Leica DMRE microscope equipped with a digital camera (DFC300 FX, Leica, Bensheim, Germany). Image acquisition and processing was performed using the Leica application suite software (Leica, Bensheim, Germany). Apoptotic indices were calculated by dividing the number of cells stained positively for cleaved caspase-3 by the total number of cells on the basis of the nuclear DAPI stain in a determined region of interest (ROI) using ImageJ software . Three ROIs were assessed per section to derive the final counts.

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

Interleukin-1β (IL-1β) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) were measured in supernatants obtained from organotypic cultures using commercially available ELISA kits (R&D Systems, Wiesbaden, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Evaluation was performed using a Tecan Genios Pro multiwell spectrophotometer (Tecan, Crailsheim, Germany) and Magellan software (Tecan, Crailsheim, Germany) for 4-parameter fitting.

For normalization, the total protein content of the supernatants was measured using BCA (bicinchoninic acid) protein assay reagent (Thermo Scientific, Bonn, Germany).

Cell viability assay (MTS assay)

To prepare eluates of sealant materials, 10 μl of each sealant was applied to human enamel slices according to the manufacturers’ recommendations. Eluates of sealant materials were prepared by immersion of sealant-treated enamel slices in 1 ml of artificial saliva (16.1 mM KCl, 14.4 mM NaCl, 1.9 mM KH 2 PO 4 , 1.4 mM CaCl 2 , pH 6.8 ) for 24 h at 37 °C. 50 μl of the leachings were mixed with equal amounts of 2× DMEM fully supplemented with FCS and antibiotics, and 3000–5000 cells were seeded in each well in a 96-well flat-bottomed plate before being incubated for 24 h at 37 °C, 5% CO 2 . The assay was performed according to the manufacturer’s protocol (Promega, Mannheim, Germany). The optical density (OD) was measured using a multiwell spectrophotometer (Tecan, Crailsheim, Germany) at a wavelength of 490 nm. Experiments were set up in triplicate.

High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)

To prepare eluates of sealant materials, 10 μl of each sealant was applied according to the manufacturers’ recommendations to human enamel slices. Eluates of sealant materials were prepared by immersion of sealant-treated enamel slices in 1 ml of a 75%:25% mixture of ethanol and water for 24 h at 37 °C. For HPLC, an Äkta Purifier (GE Healthcare, Freiburg, Germany) with a connected UV-900 detector was used. Analysis was performed using Accucore C18 columns (100 × 3 mm, Thermo Scientific, Dreieich, Germany). 10 μl of the eluates in 40 μl phase A were injected. The gradient at time = 0 min was 100% phase A (20% acetonitrile in water) and 0% phase B (90% acetonitrile in water) and at time = 40 min 100% phase B and 0% phase A. Flow rate was 1 ml/min. The elution profile was monitored at detection wavelengths of 205 nm and 280 nm. The column was calibrated with known concentrations of resin monomers in ethanol/water (75:25) (bis-GMA (bisphenol-A-glycerolate dimethacrylate), Lot No.: MKBH5136V), BPA (bisphenol A, Lot No.: MKAA2480V), bis-EMA (bisphenol-A-ethoxylate dimethacrylate, Lot No.: MKBG1860V), TEGDMA (triethylene glycol dimethacrylate, Lot No.: STBC4723V), and UDMA (diurethane dimethacrylate, Lot No.: MKBC6935), all purchased from Sigma Aldrich (Steinheim, Germany). Linear regression analysis (MS Excel, Unterschleißheim, Germany) based on the peak area at the corresponding retention times was used to calculate the concentration of monomer in each sample. The detections limits were 2.9 nmol/ml for bis-GMA, 3.1 nmol/ml for BPA, 6.2 nmol/ml for TEGDMA, and 5.4 nmol/ml for UDMA. Three independent extracts per sealant were prepared and HPLC analyses were performed in triplicate. Since leaching of resin monomers is dependent on the sealant surface area, the surface area of individual enamel slices was quantified on macrophotographs using ImageJ . Data are presented in nmol/mm 2 as mean ± standard deviation.

Statistics

Results are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Differences between groups were compared using one-way ANOVA followed by the appropriate post hoc test. All statistics were performed using SigmaStat software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Results were considered significant with a P value <0.05.

Materials and methods

Sealants

The sealants used in this study are presented in Table 1 .

Table 1
Products used in this study.
Product Category Composition Supplier Curing Etching Lot. No. Abbreviation
L.E.D. Pro Seal ® Composite, filled Hexafunctional urethane acrylate, ethoxylated bisphenol A diacrylate, ethoxylated trimethylolpropane triacrylate, EDMAB, camphorquinone, silica Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, USA 20 s, light 30 s 11834 ProSeal LED
Light Bond™ Filled Sealant Composite, filled Glass filler, hydrofluoride methacrylate, urethane dimethacrylate, triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, USA 20 s, light 30 s 103113 LightBond F
Ultraseal ® XT Plus Clear Composite, filled Diurethane dimethacrylate, bis GMA, 2-dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate, sodium monofluorophosphate, titanium dioxide Ultradent, Utah, USA 20 s, light 15–20 s B6RBP UltraSeal XT
Light Bond™ Sealant Composite, unfilled Bisphenol A diglycidylmethacrylate, triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate, urethane dimethacrylate, tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate, hydrofluoride methacrylate Reliance Orthodontic Products, Itasca, USA 10 s, light 30 s 11892 LightBond UF
Protecto ® CaF2 Nano Silicone Ethylacetate, siliconepolyacrylate, olaflur, nano-fluorapatite, nano-calciumfluoride BonaDent, Frankfurt, Germany 60 s, air None 4201383 Protecto nano
Clinpro™ XT Varnish Glass ionomer Part A (paste): silane treated glass, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate, water, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether dimethacrylate, silane treated silica. Part B (liquid): copolymer of acrylic and itaconic acids, water, 2-hydroxyethyl, calcium glycerophosphate 3M Unitek, Seefeld, Germany 20 s, light 15–60 s N178061 ClinProXT
Compositions are according to the manufacturers’ specifications; curing and etching are according to the manufacturers’ instructions.

Cell culture and organotypic co-culture of gingival cells

Gingival tissue and alveolar bone were obtained from patients following extraction of third molars. Informed consent was obtained from volunteers who were undergoing removal of wisdom teeth for medical reasons. The local ethics committee (Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg; 80/94S147/2010) approved harvest of the tissues.

The isolation of gingival cells was performed as described previously . Briefly, gingival tissues were separated into epithelial and connective tissue elements. Epithelial tissue was dissociated using dispase (2.4 U/ml, 37 °C, 30 min). Cells were seeded and subcultured in keratinocyte growth medium (Promo Cell, Heidelberg, Germany) at 37 °C in a humidified 5% CO 2 incubator. Keratinocytes were immortalized using the E6 and E7 genes of human papilloma virus 16 (HPV-16) using recombinant retroviruses .

Gingival fibroblasts were obtained from the remaining connective tissue of explant cultures as described by .

Gingival fibroblasts were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium (DMEM; Invitrogen, Karlsruhe, Germany) supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (FCS), 2 mM l -glutamine, antibiotics, and antimycotics at 37 °C in a humidified 5% CO 2 incubator. Immortalized gingival keratinocytes were used between passages 14 and 16. Gingival fibroblasts were used between passages 4 and 6 both for the organotypic cultures and for the monolayer cultures used for viability assays.

Organotypic cultures of human gingival cells were established as described by : bovine collagen type I (Life Technologies, Darmstadt, Germany) was polymerized at a concentration of 3 mg/ml in Hanks’ buffered solution (HBS, 10×), gingival fibroblasts were added in FCS at a concentration of 1 × 10 5 cells/ml collagen, and collagen gels were polymerized by neutralization with NaOH (1 N). Collagen gels containing gingival fibroblasts were allowed to polymerize and were immersed in organotypic culture medium (DMEM/Ham’s F-12 1:1 mixture, Life Technologies, Darmstadt, Germany) supplemented with bovine pituitary extract [0.004 mg/ml], epidermal growth factor (EGF; recombinant human) [0.125 ng/ml], insulin (recombinant human) [5 μg/ml], hydrocortisone [0.33 μg/ml], epinephrine [0.39 μg/ml], transferrin, holo (human) [10 μg/ml], and CaCl 2 [0.06 mM]. After 24 h, gingival keratinocytes (7 × 10 5 cells per collagen gel) were seeded on the surface of the collagen gels and allowed to adhere for 24 h. At this stage organotypic cultures were lifted onto metal grids allowing air contact of the upper keratinocyte layer. Organotypic culture medium was changed every second day and the cultures were matured for 21 days.

Preparation of enamel slices and challenge with organotypic cultures of human gingival cells

Enamel slices were prepared from extracted teeth. Teeth were collected after informed consent was obtained from patients who underwent extractions for medical reasons. The local ethics committee (Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg; S-301/2011) approved collection of the teeth. Teeth were cleaned from adherent tissue and stored in artificial saliva (16.1 mM KCl, 14.4 mM NaCl, 1.9 mM KH 2 PO 4 , 1.4 mM CaCl 2 , pH 6.8) to avoid demineralization. Enamel slices (200 μm) were prepared from teeth using an inner diameter saw (Leica, Wetzlar, Germany). Slices were sterilized by autoclaving and stored in sterile artificial saliva at 4 °C until further use. Equal amounts of sealants (10 μl) were applied according to the manufacturers’ recommendations (see Table 1 ). Light curing was performed using an Optilux 501 polymerization lamp (Kerr Corp., Orange, CA, USA); luminescence was routinely tested and mean values were 1000 mW/cm 2 . Curing times were as recommended by the manufacturer. Additionally, to asses the effects of altered curing times light-curing or air-drying times were increased and decreased by 50%, respectively. Sealant-treated enamel slices were challenged with mature organotypic cultures by direct application of the slices on to the epithelial layer of the organotypic cultures for 24 h. Untreated or etched-only slices served as controls.

For the assessment of differentiation and apoptosis by immunofluorescent staining, the organotypic cultures were carefully frozen over liquid nitrogen and embedded in Tissue-Tek (Sakura Finetek, Staufen, Germany). Cryosections (10 μm) were mounted on adhesive slides, air-dried, and fixed with methanol/acetone (1:1) for 10 min at −20 °C and frozen at −80 °C until analyzed.

For the quantification of pro-inflammatory cytokines, culture supernatants were harvested and snap frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at −80 °C until analysis.

Immunofluorescent staining

Incubation with primary antibodies (anti-CK14, clone LL002, 1:50; anti-involucrin, clone SY5 1:50, both from Abcam, Cambridge, UK); cleaved caspase-3 (Asp175 clone 5A1E 1:600, Cell Signaling Technologies/New England Biolabs, Frankfurt, Germany) was performed overnight at 4 °C. After washing (3 × 10 min in PBS), sections were incubated with fluorochrome-conjugated antibodies (Jackson-ImmunoResearch/Dianova, Hamburg, Germany), for 1 h at room temperature. Sections were mounted in antifade reagent with DAPI (4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole) as a counterstain.

Microphotographs were taken using a Leica DMRE microscope equipped with a digital camera (DFC300 FX, Leica, Bensheim, Germany). Image acquisition and processing was performed using the Leica application suite software (Leica, Bensheim, Germany). Apoptotic indices were calculated by dividing the number of cells stained positively for cleaved caspase-3 by the total number of cells on the basis of the nuclear DAPI stain in a determined region of interest (ROI) using ImageJ software . Three ROIs were assessed per section to derive the final counts.

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

Interleukin-1β (IL-1β) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) were measured in supernatants obtained from organotypic cultures using commercially available ELISA kits (R&D Systems, Wiesbaden, Germany) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Evaluation was performed using a Tecan Genios Pro multiwell spectrophotometer (Tecan, Crailsheim, Germany) and Magellan software (Tecan, Crailsheim, Germany) for 4-parameter fitting.

For normalization, the total protein content of the supernatants was measured using BCA (bicinchoninic acid) protein assay reagent (Thermo Scientific, Bonn, Germany).

Cell viability assay (MTS assay)

To prepare eluates of sealant materials, 10 μl of each sealant was applied to human enamel slices according to the manufacturers’ recommendations. Eluates of sealant materials were prepared by immersion of sealant-treated enamel slices in 1 ml of artificial saliva (16.1 mM KCl, 14.4 mM NaCl, 1.9 mM KH 2 PO 4 , 1.4 mM CaCl 2 , pH 6.8 ) for 24 h at 37 °C. 50 μl of the leachings were mixed with equal amounts of 2× DMEM fully supplemented with FCS and antibiotics, and 3000–5000 cells were seeded in each well in a 96-well flat-bottomed plate before being incubated for 24 h at 37 °C, 5% CO 2 . The assay was performed according to the manufacturer’s protocol (Promega, Mannheim, Germany). The optical density (OD) was measured using a multiwell spectrophotometer (Tecan, Crailsheim, Germany) at a wavelength of 490 nm. Experiments were set up in triplicate.

High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)

To prepare eluates of sealant materials, 10 μl of each sealant was applied according to the manufacturers’ recommendations to human enamel slices. Eluates of sealant materials were prepared by immersion of sealant-treated enamel slices in 1 ml of a 75%:25% mixture of ethanol and water for 24 h at 37 °C. For HPLC, an Äkta Purifier (GE Healthcare, Freiburg, Germany) with a connected UV-900 detector was used. Analysis was performed using Accucore C18 columns (100 × 3 mm, Thermo Scientific, Dreieich, Germany). 10 μl of the eluates in 40 μl phase A were injected. The gradient at time = 0 min was 100% phase A (20% acetonitrile in water) and 0% phase B (90% acetonitrile in water) and at time = 40 min 100% phase B and 0% phase A. Flow rate was 1 ml/min. The elution profile was monitored at detection wavelengths of 205 nm and 280 nm. The column was calibrated with known concentrations of resin monomers in ethanol/water (75:25) (bis-GMA (bisphenol-A-glycerolate dimethacrylate), Lot No.: MKBH5136V), BPA (bisphenol A, Lot No.: MKAA2480V), bis-EMA (bisphenol-A-ethoxylate dimethacrylate, Lot No.: MKBG1860V), TEGDMA (triethylene glycol dimethacrylate, Lot No.: STBC4723V), and UDMA (diurethane dimethacrylate, Lot No.: MKBC6935), all purchased from Sigma Aldrich (Steinheim, Germany). Linear regression analysis (MS Excel, Unterschleißheim, Germany) based on the peak area at the corresponding retention times was used to calculate the concentration of monomer in each sample. The detections limits were 2.9 nmol/ml for bis-GMA, 3.1 nmol/ml for BPA, 6.2 nmol/ml for TEGDMA, and 5.4 nmol/ml for UDMA. Three independent extracts per sealant were prepared and HPLC analyses were performed in triplicate. Since leaching of resin monomers is dependent on the sealant surface area, the surface area of individual enamel slices was quantified on macrophotographs using ImageJ . Data are presented in nmol/mm 2 as mean ± standard deviation.

Statistics

Results are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Differences between groups were compared using one-way ANOVA followed by the appropriate post hoc test. All statistics were performed using SigmaStat software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Results were considered significant with a P value <0.05.

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Nov 25, 2017 | Posted by in Dental Materials | Comments Off on Biological evaluation of enamel sealants in an organotypic model of the human gingiva
Premium Wordpress Themes by UFO Themes