Evaluation of dental pulp stem cells behavior after odontogenic differentiation induction by three different bioactive materials on two different scaffolds.

BACKGROUND: To study the odontogenic potential of dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) after induction with three different bioactive materials: activa bioactive (base/liner) (AB), TheraCal LC (TC), and mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA), when combined with two different types of scaffolds. METHODS: DPSCs were isolated from freshly extracted premolars of young orthodontic patients, cultured, expanded to passage 4 (P), and characterized by flow cytometric analysis. DPSCs were seeded onto two scaffolds in contact with different materials (AB, TC, and MTA). The first scaffold contained polycaprolactone-nano-chitosan and synthetic hydroxyapatite (PCL-NC-HA), whereas the second scaffold contained polycaprolactone-nano-chitosan and synthetic Mg-substituted hydroxyapatite (PCL-NC-Mg-HA). DPSC viability and proliferation were evaluated at various time points. To assess odontoblastic differentiation, gene expression analysis of dentin sialophosphoprotein (DSPP) by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and morphological changes in cells were performed using inverted microscope phase contrast images and scanning electron microscopy. The fold-change in DSPP between subgroups was compared using a one-way ANOVA. Tukey's test was used to compare the fold-change in DSPP between the two subgroups in multiple comparisons, and P was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: DSPP expression was significantly higher in the PCL-NC-Mg-HA group than in the PCL-NC-HA group, and scanning electron microscopy revealed a strong attachment of odontoblast-like cells to the scaffold that had a stronger odontogenic differentiation effect on DPSCs than the scaffold that did not contain magnesium. MTA has a significantly higher odontogenic differentiation effect on cultured DPSCs than AB or TC does. The combination of scaffolds and bioactive materials improves DPSCs induction in odontoblast-like cells. CONCLUSIONS: The PCL-NC-Mg-HA scaffold showed better odontogenic differentiation effects on cultured DPSCs. Compared to AB and TC, MTA is the most effective bioactive material for inducing the odontogenic differentiation of cultured DPSCs.

3-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the performance of posterior composite restorations lined with ion-releasing materials.

To evaluate the impact of using ion-releasing liners on the 3-year clinical performance of posterior resin composite restorations after selective caries excavation with polymer burs. 20 patients were enrolled in this trial. Each patient had two deep carious lesions, one on each side of the mouth. After selective caries removal using polymer bur (PolyBur P1, Komet, Brasseler GmbH Co. KG, Lemgo, Germany), cavities were lined with bioactive ionic resin composite (Activa Bioactive Base/Liner, Pulpdent, Watertown, MA, USA) or resin-modified glass ionomer liner (Riva Light Cure, SDI, Bayswater, Victoria, Australia). All cavities were then restored with nanofilled resin composite (Filtek Z350XT, 3M Oral Care, St. Paul, MN, USA). All the tested materials were placed according to the manufacturers' instructions. Clinical evaluation was accomplished using World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria at baseline and after 6 months, 1, 2, and 3 years. Data were analyzed using Mann-whitney U and Friedman tests (p < 0.05). The success rates were 100% for all resin composite restorations either lined with ion-releasing resin composite or resin-modified glass ionomer liner. Mann-whitney U test revealed that there were no statistically significant differences between both ion-releasing lining material groups for all criteria during the follow-up periods (p > 0.05). Resin composite restorations showed acceptable clinical performance over 3 years either lined with bioactive ionic or resin-modified glass ionomer liners after selective caries excavation preserving pulp vitality. After the 3-year follow-up period, Activa Bioactive and Riva Light Cure liners were clinically effective and they exhibited with the overlying composite restorations successful clinical performance.Trial registration number: NCT05470959. Date of registration: 22/7/2022. Retrospectively registered.

Microshear Bond Strength of Bioactive Materials to Dentin and Resin Composite.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate microshear bond strength (µSBS) of bioactive ionic resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer liner (RMGI) to dentin and resin composite. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The enamel of 11 posterior molar teeth was removed to expose dentin and then placed in acrylic blocks. Each specimen received three microcylindrical Tygon tubes filled with bioactive ionic resin composite (Activa Bioactive base/liner (PULPDENT: , MA, USA)), RMGI (Riva light cure SDI LTD, Bayswater, Australia), and resin composite (Filtek Z350xt, MN, USA). Composite discs (n = 11) were fabricated from nanofilled resin composite (Filtek Z350xt) and then fixed in acrylic blocks. Each specimen received two microcylindrical Tygon tubes filled with Activa Bioactive base/liner and Riva RMGI. All specimens were mounted individually to universal testing machine for µSBS test. Failure modes were analyzed using stereomicroscope and scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: Filtek Z350xt nanofilled resin composite showed the highest µSBS values. No statistical significant difference was found between Activa Bioactive and Riva RMGI (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Bioactive ionic resin composite liner exhibited similar bond strength as RMGI to dentin and resin composite.