Biocompatibility of gold and stainless steel chains used for forced eruption of impacted teeth - an in vitro investigation.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical approaches for the mobilization of impacted teeth involve the use of gold chains to connect the impacted tooth with the orthodontic appliance. In this study we have compared the local effects gold plated stainless steel with stainless steel specimen using an in vitro model of the gingival mucosa and monolayer cultures of cells of the alveolus. STUDY DESIGN: Local effects on differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis and inflammatory response were tested using organotypic cultures of gingival cells. Cytotoxicity was measured by MTT (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide) assays with monolayer cultures of human periodontal cells. RESULTS: The data obtained in this study could not reveal any differences in favor of using gold plated chains during the mobilization of impacted teeth. CONCLUSION: For patients not suffering from allergies against nickel there might be no rationale to favor gold plated chains, as there are no functional aspects to favor gold plated chains over stainless steel chains.

Effect of the dental adhesive, 4-META/MMA-TBB resin, on adhesion and keratinization of regenerating oral epithelium.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The 4-META/MMA-TBB [4-(2-methacryloxyethyl)trimellitic anhydride/methyl methacrylate-tributylborane] resin is widely used as a dental adhesive. It has also been applied in the dressing of gingival wound surfaces following periodontal surgery. However, its effect on the regeneration and/or cell attachment of the oral epithelium remains to be clarified. To evaluate the effect of the resin applied as a wound dressing, we investigated expression of laminin 5, integrin beta(4) and cytokeratin 14 in regenerating oral epithelium treated with this resin following gingivectomy from the viewpoint of cell attachment and differentiation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The resin was applied to the entire wound surface in rats after gingival surgery, and regenerating epithelium was examined immediately and at 1, 3, 5, 7 and 14 days later. The resin was removed 2 weeks after application in some animals and tissue further examined at 1, 3, 5 and 7 days later. RESULTS: Regenerating epithelium under the resin was not keratinized, but became keratinized immediately after removal of the resin. Laminin 5 and integrin beta(4) were immunolocalized in the basal lamina, the internal basal lamina, in marginal cells of the regenerating epithelium and at the resin-regenerating epithelium interface. Cytokeratin 14 localized in the regenerating epithelium underneath the resin, as well as in healthy and regenerated junctional epithelial cells. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that this resin covers the wound surface and that the regenerating epithelium biologically adheres to the resin during the initial process of its regeneration.