Cargando…

Comparative Evaluation of Osteogenic Potential of Conventional Glass-ionomer Cement with Chitosan-modified Glass-ionomer and Bioactive Glass-modified Glass-ionomer Cement An In vitro Study

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the osteogenic potential of conventional glass-ionomer cement (GIC) with chitosan-modified GIC (CH-GIC) and bioactive glass-modified GIC (BAG-GIC) as a function of time in varying proportions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CH-GIC was prepared by adding 10 v/v% (Gro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ranjani, Muthukrishnan Sudharshana, Kavitha, Mahendran, Venkatesh, Srinivasan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8092095/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33967535
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_474_19
_version_ 1783687590047645696
author Ranjani, Muthukrishnan Sudharshana
Kavitha, Mahendran
Venkatesh, Srinivasan
author_facet Ranjani, Muthukrishnan Sudharshana
Kavitha, Mahendran
Venkatesh, Srinivasan
author_sort Ranjani, Muthukrishnan Sudharshana
collection PubMed
description AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the osteogenic potential of conventional glass-ionomer cement (GIC) with chitosan-modified GIC (CH-GIC) and bioactive glass-modified GIC (BAG-GIC) as a function of time in varying proportions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CH-GIC was prepared by adding 10 v/v% (Group II) and 50 v/v% (Group III) CH to the commercial liquid of GIC. BAG-GIC was prepared by the addition of 10 wt% (Group IV) and 30 wt% (Group V) of BAG to the GIC powder. Conventional GIC was kept as Group I. Nine round-shaped samples measuring 2 mm thick and 5 mm in diameter were prepared for every experimental material. Human osteosarcoma cells were cultured and cell proliferation was assessed at 24, 48, and 72 h using 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)- 2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, and cell differentiation was assessed at 7,14, and 21 days using alkaline phosphatase (ALP) assay. All experiments were done in triplicate. The data obtained were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significant difference post hoc multiple comparisons at 0.05 level significance. RESULTS: Cell culture studies showed a significant increase in proliferative activity and ALP activity in Group II, III, IV, and V than Group I at all-time intervals (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in osteogenic potential between CH-GIC and BAG-GIC groups. CONCLUSION: The osteogenic potential was significantly higher in CH-GIC and BAG-GIC compared to conventional GIC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8092095
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80920952021-05-06 Comparative Evaluation of Osteogenic Potential of Conventional Glass-ionomer Cement with Chitosan-modified Glass-ionomer and Bioactive Glass-modified Glass-ionomer Cement An In vitro Study Ranjani, Muthukrishnan Sudharshana Kavitha, Mahendran Venkatesh, Srinivasan Contemp Clin Dent Original Article AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the osteogenic potential of conventional glass-ionomer cement (GIC) with chitosan-modified GIC (CH-GIC) and bioactive glass-modified GIC (BAG-GIC) as a function of time in varying proportions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CH-GIC was prepared by adding 10 v/v% (Group II) and 50 v/v% (Group III) CH to the commercial liquid of GIC. BAG-GIC was prepared by the addition of 10 wt% (Group IV) and 30 wt% (Group V) of BAG to the GIC powder. Conventional GIC was kept as Group I. Nine round-shaped samples measuring 2 mm thick and 5 mm in diameter were prepared for every experimental material. Human osteosarcoma cells were cultured and cell proliferation was assessed at 24, 48, and 72 h using 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)- 2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay, and cell differentiation was assessed at 7,14, and 21 days using alkaline phosphatase (ALP) assay. All experiments were done in triplicate. The data obtained were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significant difference post hoc multiple comparisons at 0.05 level significance. RESULTS: Cell culture studies showed a significant increase in proliferative activity and ALP activity in Group II, III, IV, and V than Group I at all-time intervals (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in osteogenic potential between CH-GIC and BAG-GIC groups. CONCLUSION: The osteogenic potential was significantly higher in CH-GIC and BAG-GIC compared to conventional GIC. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021 2021-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8092095/ /pubmed/33967535 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_474_19 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Contemporary Clinical Dentistry https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ranjani, Muthukrishnan Sudharshana
Kavitha, Mahendran
Venkatesh, Srinivasan
Comparative Evaluation of Osteogenic Potential of Conventional Glass-ionomer Cement with Chitosan-modified Glass-ionomer and Bioactive Glass-modified Glass-ionomer Cement An In vitro Study
title Comparative Evaluation of Osteogenic Potential of Conventional Glass-ionomer Cement with Chitosan-modified Glass-ionomer and Bioactive Glass-modified Glass-ionomer Cement An In vitro Study
title_full Comparative Evaluation of Osteogenic Potential of Conventional Glass-ionomer Cement with Chitosan-modified Glass-ionomer and Bioactive Glass-modified Glass-ionomer Cement An In vitro Study
title_fullStr Comparative Evaluation of Osteogenic Potential of Conventional Glass-ionomer Cement with Chitosan-modified Glass-ionomer and Bioactive Glass-modified Glass-ionomer Cement An In vitro Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Evaluation of Osteogenic Potential of Conventional Glass-ionomer Cement with Chitosan-modified Glass-ionomer and Bioactive Glass-modified Glass-ionomer Cement An In vitro Study
title_short Comparative Evaluation of Osteogenic Potential of Conventional Glass-ionomer Cement with Chitosan-modified Glass-ionomer and Bioactive Glass-modified Glass-ionomer Cement An In vitro Study
title_sort comparative evaluation of osteogenic potential of conventional glass-ionomer cement with chitosan-modified glass-ionomer and bioactive glass-modified glass-ionomer cement an in vitro study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8092095/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33967535
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_474_19
work_keys_str_mv AT ranjanimuthukrishnansudharshana comparativeevaluationofosteogenicpotentialofconventionalglassionomercementwithchitosanmodifiedglassionomerandbioactiveglassmodifiedglassionomercementaninvitrostudy
AT kavithamahendran comparativeevaluationofosteogenicpotentialofconventionalglassionomercementwithchitosanmodifiedglassionomerandbioactiveglassmodifiedglassionomercementaninvitrostudy
AT venkateshsrinivasan comparativeevaluationofosteogenicpotentialofconventionalglassionomercementwithchitosanmodifiedglassionomerandbioactiveglassmodifiedglassionomercementaninvitrostudy