
The aim of this study was to evaluate cytotoxic potencies of two light cured composite materials after heating on different temperatures and cured directly and through CAD/CAM overlay.Composite materials (microfilled-hybrid Gradia Direct Posterior and Beautifil II) were heated in a Calset warming unit at three different temperatures (T1:37°C, T2:54°C, T3:68°C). A small amount of heated composite material was placed in a round mold (diameter 6mm; 0.65mm thick), covered with Mylar sheet, pressed and polymerized with Bluephase LED unit. One group of samples were polymerized directly, and the other group through 2mm thick CAD/CAM ceramic-reinforced polymer (CRP) and CAD/CAM lithium disilicate ceramic (LDC) overlay for 20 and 40 seconds. The polymerized samples were placed immediately after curing in a lymphocyte cell culture. The viability of peripheral blood lymphocytes was evaluated using a dye exclusion technique by simultaneous staining with ethidium bromide and acridine orange. Quantitative assessments were made by determination of the percentage of viable, apoptotic and necrotic cells. The Pearson chi-square test was used for statistical analysis.In case of 20 seconds polymerization, the highest number of viable cells polymerization were recorded when materials were heated at 37°C (T1), while in case of 40 seconds polymerization, the highest number of viable cells were recorded when the materials were heated at 54°C (T2). The samples polymerized through CAD/CAM overlays showed less cytotoxicity than samples polymerized directly.Apart from composite material composition, the cell viability was also influenced by curing time, temperature of pre-heating and polymerization pattern.
Cytotoxicity, Dentistry, Temperature, Pre-heating of Composites, RK1-715, Composite Material, Original Scientific Papers
Cytotoxicity, Dentistry, Temperature, Pre-heating of Composites, RK1-715, Composite Material, Original Scientific Papers
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
