Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-03-2024 | Research

Comparative bioactivity and immunomodulatory potential of the new Bioroot Flow and AH Plus Bioceramic sealer: An in vitro study on hPDLSCs

Authors: José Luis Sanz, Sergio López-García, David García-Bernal, Francisco Javier Rodríguez-Lozano, Leopoldo Forner, Adrián Lozano, Laura Murcia

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 3/2024

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the cytocompatibility, bioactivity, and anti-inflammatory potential of the new pre-mixed calcium silicate cement-based sealers Bioroot Flow (BrF) and AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer (AHPbcs) on human periodontal ligament stem cells (hPDLSCs) compared to the epoxy resin-based sealer AH Plus (AHP).

Materials and methods

Standardized discs and 1:1, 1:2, and 1:4 eluates of BrF, AHPbcs and AHP after setting were prepared. The following assays were performed: cell attachment and morphology via SEM, cell viability via a MTT assay, cell migration/proliferation via a wound-healing assay, cytoskeleton organization via immunofluorescence staining; cytokine release via ELISA; osteo/cemento/odontogenic marker expression via RT-qPCR, and cell mineralized nodule formation via Alizarin Red S staining. HPDLSCs were isolated from extracted third molars from healthy patients. Comparisons were made with hPDLSCs cultured in unconditioned (negative control) or osteogenic (positive control) culture media. Statistical significance was established at p < 0.05.

Results

Both BrF and AHPbcs showed significantly positive results in the cytocompatibility assays (cell metabolic activity, migration, attachment, morphology, and cytoskeleton organization) compared with a negative control group, while AHP showed significant negative results. BrF exhibited an upregulation of at least one osteo/cementogenic marker compared to the negative and positive control groups. BrF showed a significantly higher calcified nodule formation than AHPbcs, the negative and positive control groups, while AHPbcs was higher than the negative control group. Both were also significantly higher than AHP group.

Conclusion

BrF and AHPbcs exhibit adequate and comparable cytocompatibility on hPDLSCs. BrF also promoted the osteo/cementogenic differentiation of hPDLSCs. Both calcium silicate-based sealers favored the downregulation of the inflammatory cytokine IL-6 and the calcified nodule formation from hPDLSCs. BrF exerted a significantly higher influence on cell mineralization than AHPbcs.

Clinical relevance

This is the first study to elucidate the biological properties and immunomodulatory potential of Bioroot Flow and AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer. The results act as supporting evidence for their use in root canal treatment.

Available only for authorised users

Girelli C, Lacerda M, Lemos C et al (2022) The thermoplastic techniques or single-cone technique on the quality of root canal filling with tricalcium silicate-based sealer: An integrative review. J Clin Exp Dent 14:e566–e572. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.59387CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Li J, Chen L, Zeng C et al (2022) Clinical outcome of bioceramic sealer iRoot SP extrusion in root canal treatment: a retrospective analysis. Head Face Med 18:28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-022-00332-3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kim J, Cho S-Y, Choi Y et al (2022) Clinical Efficacy of Sealer-based Obturation Using Calcium Silicate Sealers: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Endod 48:144–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2021.11.011CrossRefPubMed

Yang X, Zheng T, Yang N et al (2023) A Review of the research methods and progress of biocompatibility evaluation of root canal sealers. Aust Endod J 49:508–514. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12725CrossRefPubMed

Estivalet MS, de Araújo LP, Immich F et al (2022) Bioactivity Potential of Bioceramic-Based Root Canal Sealers: A Scoping Review. Life 12:1853. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12111853CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Rengo S (2023) Bioceramics, a turning point. G Ital Endod 37. https://doi.org/10.32067/GIE.2023.37.01.14

Vallittu PK, Boccaccini AR, Hupa L, Watts DC (2018) Bioactive dental materials—Do they exist and what does bioactivity mean? Dent Mater 34:693–694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.03.001CrossRefPubMed

Pedano MS, Li X, Yoshihara K et al (2020) Cytotoxicity and Bioactivity of Dental Pulp-Capping Agents towards Human Tooth-Pulp Cells: A Systematic Review of In-Vitro Studies and Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Controlled Clinical Trials. Materials 13:2670. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13122670CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Sanz JL, Guerrero-Gironés J, Pecci-Lloret MP et al (2021) Biological interactions between calcium silicate-based endodontic biomaterials and periodontal ligament stem cells: A systematic review of in vitro studies. Int Endod J 54:2025–2043. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13600CrossRefPubMed

10.

Gronthos S, Mrozik K, Shi S, Bartold PM (2006) Ovine Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells: Isolation, Characterization, and Differentiation Potential. Calcif Tissue Int 79:310–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-006-0040-4CrossRefPubMed

11.

Tomokiyo A, Wada N, Maeda H (2019) Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells: Regenerative Potency in Periodontium. Stem Cells Dev 28:974–985. https://doi.org/10.1089/scd.2019.0031CrossRefPubMed

12.

Sonoyama W, Liu Y, Yamaza T et al (2008) Characterization of the Apical Papilla and Its Residing Stem Cells from Human Immature Permanent Teeth: A Pilot Study. J Endod 34:166–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2007.11.021CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Saber S, Raafat S, Elashiry M et al (2023) Effect of Different Sealers on the Cytocompatibility and Osteogenic Potential of Human Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells: An In Vitro Study. J Clin Med 12:2344. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12062344CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Martins MD, Coelho FH, Moreira MS et al (2023) Cytotoxicity, biocompatibility and osteoinductive profile of an MTA -hydrogel-based cement: An in vitro and animal study. Int Endod J 56:955–967. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13929CrossRefPubMed

15.

López-García S, Rodríguez-Lozano FJ, Sanz JL et al (2023) Biological properties of Ceraputty as a retrograde filling material: an in vitro study on hPDLSCs. Clin Oral Investig 27:4233–4243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05040-zCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Castro-Jara S, Antilef B, Osbén C et al (2023) Bioactivity analysis of calcium silicate-based sealers and repair cements on the phenotype and cytokine secretion profile of CD14+ monocytes: An ex vivo study. Int Endod J 56:80–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13847CrossRefPubMed

17.

Martorano AS, Messias NS, Bighetti-Trevisan RL et al (2023) In vitro inflammatory modulation of bioceramic endodontic sealer in macrophages stimulated by bacterial lipopolysaccharide. Int Endod J 56:213–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13858CrossRefPubMed

18.

Alchawoosh A, Hashimoto K, Kawashima N et al (2023) Hydraulic calcium silicate-based root canal sealers mitigate proinflammatory cytokine synthesis and promote osteogenesis in vitro. J Dent Sci 18:1731–1739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2022.12.019CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Alhindi OH, Atmeh AR, Alhawaj H, Omar O (2023) Inflammatory response to epoxy resin and calcium silicate sealers preheated with different temperatures: an in vivo study. Clin Oral Investig 27:2235–2243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-04960-0CrossRefPubMed

20.

Guo J, Peters OA, Hosseinpour S (2023) Immunomodulatory Effects of Endodontic Sealers: A Systematic Review. Dent J (Basel) 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/DJ11020054

21.

Guerrero-Gironés J, Forner L, Sanz JL et al (2022) Scientific production on silicate-based endodontic materials: evolution and current state: a bibliometric analysis. Clin Oral Investig 26:5611–5624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04605-8CrossRefPubMed

22.

Katakidis A, Kodonas K, Fardi A, Gogos C (2023) A scientometric, bibliometric, and thematic map analysis of hydraulic calcium silicate root canal sealers. Restor Dent Endod 48. https://doi.org/10.5395/RDE.2023.48.E41

23.

Donnermeyer D, Bürklein S, Dammaschke T, Schäfer E (2019) Endodontic sealers based on calcium silicates: a systematic review. Odontology 107:421–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0400-3CrossRefPubMed

24.

Queiroz MB, Torres FFE, Rodrigues EM et al (2021) Physicochemical, biological, and antibacterial evaluation of tricalcium silicate-based reparative cements with different radiopacifiers. Dent Mater 37:311–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2020.11.014CrossRefPubMed

25.

Kwak SW, Koo J, Song M et al (2023) Physicochemical Properties and Biocompatibility of Various Bioceramic Root Canal Sealers. In Vitro Study J Endod 49:871–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2023.05.013CrossRefPubMed

26.

Nguyen LCH, Pham LNG, Van Pham K et al (2023) Cytocompatibility and cell migration evaluation of calcium silicate-based root canal sealer compared to epoxide-amine resin sealer in stem cells from human apical papilla: An in-vitro study. Aust Endod J 49:554–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12786CrossRefPubMed

27.

de Souza LC, Neves GST, Kirkpatrick T et al (2023) Physicochemical and Biological Properties of AH Plus Bioceramic. J Endod 49:69–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2022.10.009CrossRefPubMed

28.

Nagendrababu V, Murray PE, Ordinola-Zapata R et al (2021) PRILE 2021 guidelines for reporting laboratory studies in Endodontology: A consensus-based development. Int Endod J 54:1482–1490. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13542CrossRefPubMed

29.

Rodríguez-Lozano FJ, López-García S, García-Bernal D et al (2020) Chemical composition and bioactivity potential of the new Endosequence BC Sealer formulation HiFlow. Int Endod J 53:1216–1228. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13327CrossRefPubMed

30.

Sanz JL, López-García S, Rodríguez-Lozano FJ et al (2022) Cytocompatibility and bioactive potential of AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer: An in vitro study. Int Endod J 55:1066–1080. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13805CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Dominici M, Le Blanc K, Mueller I et al (2006) Minimal criteria for defining multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells. The International Society for Cellular Therapy position statement. Cytotherapy 8:315–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/14653240600855905CrossRefPubMed

32.

Oh H, Kim E, Lee S et al (2020) Comparison of Biocompatibility of Calcium Silicate-Based Sealers and Epoxy Resin-Based Sealer on Human Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells. Materials 13:5242. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13225242CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Xue K, Hu G, Wu L et al (2023) The bioceramic sealer iRoot SP promotes osteogenic differentiation of human stem cells from apical papilla via miR-141-3p/SPAG9/MAPK signalling pathway. Int Endod J 56:1241–1253. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13948CrossRefPubMed

34.

Rodríguez-Lozano FJ, Collado-González M, Tomás-Catalá CJ et al (2019) GuttaFlow Bioseal promotes spontaneous differentiation of human periodontal ligament stem cells into cementoblast-like cells. Dent Mater 35:114–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.11.003CrossRefPubMed

35.

Yan Y, Li Y, Chi Y et al (2023) A comparative study of biological properties of three root canal sealers. Clin Oral Investig 28:11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05402-7CrossRefPubMed

36.

Wu X, Yan M, Lu J et al (2020) iRoot SP Promotes Osteo/Odontogenesis of Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells via Activation of NF-κB and MAPK Signaling Pathways. Stem Cells Int 2020:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6673467CrossRef

37.

Kim M-A, Rosa V, Neelakantan P et al (2021) Characterization, Antimicrobial Effects, and Cytocompatibility of a Root Canal Sealer Produced by Pozzolan Reaction between Calcium Hydroxide and Silica. Materials 14:2863. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14112863CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Zheng J-J, Kang X-Y, Li S-M et al (2020) Effects of MTA, iRoot SP and AH Plus on proliferation and differentiation of human periodontal ligament stem cells. Shanghai journal of stomatology 29:449–455PubMed

39.

Saber SM, Gomaa SM, Elashiry MM et al (2023) Comparative biological properties of resin-free and resin-based calcium silicate-based endodontic repair materials on human periodontal ligament stem cells. Clin Oral Investig 27:6757–6768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05288-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

López-García S, Pecci-Lloret MR, Guerrero-Gironés J et al (2019) Comparative Cytocompatibility and Mineralization Potential of Bio-C Sealer and TotalFill BC Sealer. Materials 12:3087. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12193087CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

de Oliveira PY, Lacerda MFLS, da Maranduba CM, C, et al (2022) The response of Mesenchymal Stem Cells to endodontic materials. Braz Dent J 33:33–43. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440202204786CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD (2001) Analysis of Relative Gene Expression Data Using Real-Time Quantitative PCR and the 2−ΔΔCT Method. Methods 25:402–408. https://doi.org/10.1006/meth.2001.1262CrossRefPubMed

43.

Knorr A, Mestieri LB, Pinheiro LS et al (2021) Cytotoxicity and Bioactivity of Calcium Silicate-based Cements in a Culture of Stem Cells from the Apical Papilla. Iran Endod J 16:225–231. https://doi.org/10.22037/IEJ.V16I4.30747CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Yune J-Y, Lee D, Kim S-Y (2023) The Combined Effects of Hydraulic Calcium Silicate Cement and Enamel Matrix Derivative Regarding Osteogenic and Dentinogenic Differentiation on Human Dental Pulp Stem Cells. Materials 16:4003. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16114003CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Silva Almeida LH, Moraes RR, Morgental RD, Pappen FG (2017) Are Premixed Calcium Silicate–based Endodontic Sealers Comparable to Conventional Materials? A Systematic Review of In Vitro Studies. J Endod 43:527–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.11.019CrossRefPubMed

46.

Bhandari SS, Palin W, Kuehne SA, Camilleri J (2023) Investigating best practice for specimen preparation for biological testing of root canal sealers. Dent Mater. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2023.12.001CrossRefPubMed

47.

Zamparini F, Prati C, Taddei P et al (2022) Chemical-Physical Properties and Bioactivity of New Premixed Calcium Silicate-Bioceramic Root Canal Sealers. Int J Mol Sci 23:13914. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232213914CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Kandemir Demirci G, Çöven FO, Güneri P et al (2023) The solubility, pH value, chemical structure, radiopacity, and cytotoxicity of four different root canal sealers: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 27:5413–5425. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00784-023-05160-6CrossRefPubMed

49.

Wuersching SN, Diegritz C, Hickel R et al (2022) A comprehensive in vitro comparison of the biological and physicochemical properties of bioactive root canal sealers. Clin Oral Investig 26:6209–6222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04570-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Gaudin A, Tolar M, Peters OA (2020) Cytokine Production and Cytotoxicity of Calcium Silicate–based Sealers in 2- and 3-dimensional Cell Culture Models. J Endod 46:818–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2020.03.011CrossRefPubMed

51.

Gandolfi MG, Taddei P, Pondrelli A, et al (2018) Demineralization, Collagen Modification and Remineralization Degree of Human Dentin after EDTA and Citric Acid Treatments. Materials (Basel) 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/MA12010025

52.

Silva EJNL, Rosa TP, Herrera DR et al (2013) Evaluation of cytotoxicity and physicochemical properties of calcium silicate-based endodontic sealer MTA Fillapex. J Endod 39:274–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOEN.2012.06.030CrossRefPubMed

53.

Saygili G, Saygili S, Tuglu I, Capar ID (2017) In Vitro Cytotoxicity of GuttaFlow Bioseal, GuttaFlow 2, AH-Plus and MTA Fillapex. Iran Endod J 12:354–359. https://doi.org/10.22037/IEJ.V12I3.15415CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

da Silva EJNL, Accorsi-Mendonça T, Pedrosa AC et al (2016) Long-Term Cytotoxicity, pH and Dissolution Rate of AH Plus and MTA Fillapex. Braz Dent J 27:419–423. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201600735CrossRefPubMed

55.

Bakir EP, Süsgün Yildirim Z, Bakir Ş, Ketani A (2022) Are resin-containing pulp capping materials as reliable as traditional ones in terms of local and systemic biological effects? Dent Mater J 41:78–86. https://doi.org/10.4012/DMJ.2021-065CrossRefPubMed

56.

Shokrzadeh M, Motafeghi FS, Lotfizadeh A et al (2023) Cytotoxicity and Mineralization Activity of Calcium Silicate-Based Root Canal Sealers Compared to Conventional Resin-Based Sealer in Human Gingival Fibroblast Cells. Int J Dent 2023:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4376579CrossRef

57.

Park M, Kim I, Kim HJ et al (2021) Physicochemical properties and cytocompatibility of newly developed calcium silicate-based sealers. Aust Endod J 47:512–519. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12515CrossRefPubMed

58.

Komabayashi T, Colmenar D, Cvach N et al (2020) Comprehensive review of current endodontic sealers. Dent Mater J 39:703–720. https://doi.org/10.4012/DMJ.2019-288CrossRefPubMed

59.

Collado-González M, García-Bernal D, Oñate-Sánchez RE et al (2017) Biocompatibility of three new calcium silicate-based endodontic sealers on human periodontal ligament stem cells. Int Endod J 50:875–884. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12703CrossRefPubMed

60.

Melo ADP, de Rosatto CMP, Ferraz DC et al (2023) Evaluation of Cytotoxicity, Cell Attachment, and Elemental Characterization of Three Calcium Silicate-Based Sealers. Materials 16:6705. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16206705CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

61.

Campi LB, Torres FFE, Rodrigues EM et al (2022) Physicochemical and biological properties of new tricalcium silicate-based repair material doped with fluoride ions and zirconium oxide as radiopacifier. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 110:862–870. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.34966CrossRefPubMed

62.

Bar-Kana I, Savion N, Narayanan AS, Pitaru S (1998) Cementum attachment protein manifestation is restricted to the mineralized tissue forming cells of the periodontium. Eur J Oral Sci 106:357–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.1998.tb02198.xCrossRefPubMed

63.

Pitaru S, Narayanan SA, Olson S et al (1995) Specific cementum attachment protein enhances selectively the attachment and migration of periodontal cells to root surfaces. J Periodontal Res 30:360–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0765.1995.tb01288.xCrossRefPubMed

64.

Ogata Y (2008) Bone sialoprotein and its transcriptional regulatory mechanism. J Periodontal Res 43:127–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0765.2007.01014.xCrossRefPubMed

65.

Chavez MB, Tan MH, Kolli TN et al (2023) Bone Sialoprotein Is Critical for Alveolar Bone Healing in Mice. J Dent Res 102:187–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345221126716CrossRefPubMed

66.

Nagasaki K, Chavez MB, Nagasaki A et al (2022) The Bone Sialoprotein RGD Domain Modulates and Maintains Periodontal Development. J Dent Res 101:1238–1247. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345221100794CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

67.

Sousa CJA, Montes CRM, Pascon EA et al (2006) Comparison of the Intraosseous Biocompatibility of AH Plus, EndoREZ, and Epiphany Root Canal Sealers. J Endod 32:656–662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.12.003CrossRefPubMed

68.

Martinho FC, Camargo SEA, Fernandes AMM et al (2018) Comparison of cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and immunological inflammatory biomarker activity of several endodontic sealers against immortalized human pulp cells. Int Endod J 51:41–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12785CrossRefPubMed

69.

Diomede F, Caputi S, Merciaro I et al (2014) Pro-inflammatory cytokine release and cell growth inhibition in primary human oral cells after exposure to endodontic sealer. Int Endod J 47:864–872. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12230CrossRefPubMed

70.

Wan Q-Q, Sun J-L, Ma Y-X et al (2021) Immunomodulatory effects of tricalcium silicate-based cements on osteogenesis. Appl Mater Today 24:101145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2021.101145CrossRef

71.

Lee B-N, Hong J-U, Kim S-M et al (2019) Anti-inflammatory and Osteogenic Effects of Calcium Silicate–based Root Canal Sealers. J Endod 45:73–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.09.006CrossRefPubMed

Title: Comparative bioactivity and immunomodulatory potential of the new Bioroot Flow and AH Plus Bioceramic sealer: An in vitro study on hPDLSCs
Authors: José Luis Sanz
Sergio López-García
David García-Bernal
Francisco Javier Rodríguez-Lozano
Leopoldo Forner
Adrián Lozano
Laura Murcia
Publication date: 01-03-2024
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 3/2024
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05593-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Comparative bioactivity and immunomodulatory potential of the new Bioroot Flow and AH Plus Bioceramic sealer: An in vitro study on hPDLSCs

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Clinical relevance

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Clinical relevance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2024

Bone formation in large/moderate gap after immediate implantation in response to different treatments: a pre-clinical study in the canine posterior mandible

Is it possible to extract primary maxillary molars without palatal injection?: a controlled clinical trial

Effects of Nd:YAG laser irradiation at different energy densities on dentin bond durability under simulated pulpal pressure

Correction to: Antibacterial and clinical efectiveness of a mouthwash with a novel active system of amine + zinc lactate + fuoride: a randomized controlled trial

Clinical and thermographic evaluation after lower third molar extractions and the application of different photobiomodulation protocols: double-blind randomised clinical trial

The efficacy of 2780 nm Er,Cr;YSGG and 940 nm Diode Laser in root canal disinfection: A randomized clinical trial