preprint · Research Square (Research Square)
Abstract Root perforations may cause periodontitis, resulting in alveolar bone loss. This study compared the zirconia containing MTA Matreva ® (MAT group) to traditional MTA Angelus ® (ANG group) as root perforation repair materials regarding the cytotoxicity and the osteogenic potential. Bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) were isolated from two albino rats and cultured. Cytotoxicity of the tested materials was assessed by 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay at three-time intervals; 3, 7 and 14 days. The tested materials were used to direct the osteogenic differentiation of BM-MSCs into osteoblasts. Evaluation of osteogenic effect was performed through assessments of calcium deposition by Alizarin red staining (ARS), expression of receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB) ligand (RANKL) protein in BM-MSCs seeded on the tested materials for 14 days and osteogenic potential gene markers expression in BM-MSCs after culture on the tested materials for 14 days. The assessed genes included; tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β), and interleukin 1-β (IL-1β). All data were statistically analyzed. There were no significant differences between ANG and MAT groups in terms of cytotoxicity and osteogenic potential (P>0.05). The highest level of cell proliferation occurred in MAT groups, followed by ANG group, compared to negative controls (NC). The MAT group showed the highest levels of Average % calcific area fraction (90%) followed by that of ANG group (68%) as compared to NC (48%). The BM-MSCs in the MAT group exhibited significantly highest level of RANKL protein expression, followed by that of ANG group. The ANG group revealed significantly greater TNF-α and IL-1β levels than those in NC. The MAT group had significantly greater value of TGF-β than that of NC. Zirconia containing MTA (MTA Matreva) has comparable cytotoxicity and osteogenic potential to traditional MTA (MTA Angelus), which is regarded a dependable material for root perforation healing.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4094980/v1
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.