Cytotoxicity evaluation of zinc oxide-eugenol and non-eugenol cements using different fibroblast cell lines

Jae Sung Kwon, Rasika P. Illeperuma, Jin Kim, Kwang Mahn Kim, Kyoung Nam Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: Despite being commonly used as temporary cements in dentistry, there is a lack of studies regarding the cytotoxicity of zinc oxide-eugenol (ZOE) and zinc oxide non-eugenol (ZONE) cements. In addition, cytotoxicity evaluation of the materials often involves animal-based cells. Therefore, in this study, a cytotoxicity evaluation of commercially available ZOE and ZONE cements was carried out using both animal and human-based cells. Materials and methods. The extraction or dilution of the extraction from four commercially available cements (two zinc oxide-eugenol and two zinc oxide non-eugenol) was tested for cytotoxicity, using three different cells and a water-soluble treatzolium salt assay. The results were confirmed using a confocal laser microscope following calcein AM and ethidium homodimer-1 staining. Results. The results showed that there was a significant difference in cell viability depending on which cell was used, even when the same material was tested. Generally, L929 showed relatively low cell viability with a low EC50 (effective concentration of extracts that caused 50% of cell viability compared to the control) value compared to both HGF-1 and hTERT-hNOF. Such results were also confirmed by a confocal laser microscope. Conclusions. Careful consideration on interpreting the results for cytotoxicity evaluation of ZOE and ZONE cements is needed when different cells are used.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)64-70
Number of pages7
JournalActa odontologica Scandinavica
Volume72
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Zinc Oxide
Eugenol
Fibroblasts
Cell Line
Cell Survival
Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement
Lasers
Dentistry
Salts
zinc oxide-non-eugenol cement
Staining and Labeling
Water

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

@article{9ff362e6756c43c187883a3149e36a3e,
title = "Cytotoxicity evaluation of zinc oxide-eugenol and non-eugenol cements using different fibroblast cell lines",
abstract = "Objectives: Despite being commonly used as temporary cements in dentistry, there is a lack of studies regarding the cytotoxicity of zinc oxide-eugenol (ZOE) and zinc oxide non-eugenol (ZONE) cements. In addition, cytotoxicity evaluation of the materials often involves animal-based cells. Therefore, in this study, a cytotoxicity evaluation of commercially available ZOE and ZONE cements was carried out using both animal and human-based cells. Materials and methods. The extraction or dilution of the extraction from four commercially available cements (two zinc oxide-eugenol and two zinc oxide non-eugenol) was tested for cytotoxicity, using three different cells and a water-soluble treatzolium salt assay. The results were confirmed using a confocal laser microscope following calcein AM and ethidium homodimer-1 staining. Results. The results showed that there was a significant difference in cell viability depending on which cell was used, even when the same material was tested. Generally, L929 showed relatively low cell viability with a low EC50 (effective concentration of extracts that caused 50{\%} of cell viability compared to the control) value compared to both HGF-1 and hTERT-hNOF. Such results were also confirmed by a confocal laser microscope. Conclusions. Careful consideration on interpreting the results for cytotoxicity evaluation of ZOE and ZONE cements is needed when different cells are used.",
author = "Kwon, {Jae Sung} and Illeperuma, {Rasika P.} and Jin Kim and Kim, {Kwang Mahn} and Kim, {Kyoung Nam}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3109/00016357.2013.798871",
language = "English",
volume = "72",
pages = "64--70",
journal = "Acta Odontologica Scandinavica",
issn = "0001-6357",
publisher = "Informa Healthcare",
number = "1",

}

Cytotoxicity evaluation of zinc oxide-eugenol and non-eugenol cements using different fibroblast cell lines. / Kwon, Jae Sung; Illeperuma, Rasika P.; Kim, Jin; Kim, Kwang Mahn; Kim, Kyoung Nam.

In: Acta odontologica Scandinavica, Vol. 72, No. 1, 01.01.2014, p. 64-70.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cytotoxicity evaluation of zinc oxide-eugenol and non-eugenol cements using different fibroblast cell lines

AU - Kwon, Jae Sung

AU - Illeperuma, Rasika P.

AU - Kim, Jin

AU - Kim, Kwang Mahn

AU - Kim, Kyoung Nam

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Objectives: Despite being commonly used as temporary cements in dentistry, there is a lack of studies regarding the cytotoxicity of zinc oxide-eugenol (ZOE) and zinc oxide non-eugenol (ZONE) cements. In addition, cytotoxicity evaluation of the materials often involves animal-based cells. Therefore, in this study, a cytotoxicity evaluation of commercially available ZOE and ZONE cements was carried out using both animal and human-based cells. Materials and methods. The extraction or dilution of the extraction from four commercially available cements (two zinc oxide-eugenol and two zinc oxide non-eugenol) was tested for cytotoxicity, using three different cells and a water-soluble treatzolium salt assay. The results were confirmed using a confocal laser microscope following calcein AM and ethidium homodimer-1 staining. Results. The results showed that there was a significant difference in cell viability depending on which cell was used, even when the same material was tested. Generally, L929 showed relatively low cell viability with a low EC50 (effective concentration of extracts that caused 50% of cell viability compared to the control) value compared to both HGF-1 and hTERT-hNOF. Such results were also confirmed by a confocal laser microscope. Conclusions. Careful consideration on interpreting the results for cytotoxicity evaluation of ZOE and ZONE cements is needed when different cells are used.

AB - Objectives: Despite being commonly used as temporary cements in dentistry, there is a lack of studies regarding the cytotoxicity of zinc oxide-eugenol (ZOE) and zinc oxide non-eugenol (ZONE) cements. In addition, cytotoxicity evaluation of the materials often involves animal-based cells. Therefore, in this study, a cytotoxicity evaluation of commercially available ZOE and ZONE cements was carried out using both animal and human-based cells. Materials and methods. The extraction or dilution of the extraction from four commercially available cements (two zinc oxide-eugenol and two zinc oxide non-eugenol) was tested for cytotoxicity, using three different cells and a water-soluble treatzolium salt assay. The results were confirmed using a confocal laser microscope following calcein AM and ethidium homodimer-1 staining. Results. The results showed that there was a significant difference in cell viability depending on which cell was used, even when the same material was tested. Generally, L929 showed relatively low cell viability with a low EC50 (effective concentration of extracts that caused 50% of cell viability compared to the control) value compared to both HGF-1 and hTERT-hNOF. Such results were also confirmed by a confocal laser microscope. Conclusions. Careful consideration on interpreting the results for cytotoxicity evaluation of ZOE and ZONE cements is needed when different cells are used.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84890894264&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84890894264&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3109/00016357.2013.798871

DO - 10.3109/00016357.2013.798871

M3 - Article

C2 - 23692288

AN - SCOPUS:84890894264

VL - 72

SP - 64

EP - 70

JO - Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

JF - Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

SN - 0001-6357

IS - 1

ER -