Biocompatibility, bioactive potential, porosity, and interface analysis calcium silicate repair cements in a dentin tube model

Rafaela Nanami Handa Inada,Marcela Borsatto Queiroz,Camila Soares Lopes,Evelin Carine Alves Silva,Fernanda Ferrari Esteves Torres,Guilherme Ferreira da Silva,Juliane Maria Guerreiro-Tanomaru,Paulo Sérgio Cerri,Mário Tanomaru-Filho
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-05002-5
Abstract:Objectives: This study is to evaluate biocompatibility, bioactive potential, porosity, and dentin/material interface of Bio-C Repair (BIOC-R), MTA Repair HP (MTAHP), and Intermediate Restorative Material (IRM). Materials and methods: Dentin tubes were implanted into subcutaneous of rats for 7, 15, 30, and 60 days. Thickness of capsules, number of inflammatory cells (ICs), interleukin-6 (IL-6), osteocalcin (OCN), and von Kossa were evaluated. Porosity and material/dentin interface voids were also analyzed. Data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's tests (p < 0.05). Results: IRM capsules were thicker and contained greater ICs and IL-6-immunopositive cells at 7 and 15 days. BIOC-R capsules exhibited higher thickness and ICs at 7 days and greater IL-6 at 7 and 15 days than MTAHP (p < 0.05). At 30 and 60 days, no significant difference was observed among the groups. OCN-immunopositive cells, von Kossa-positive, and birefringent structures were observed in BIOC-R and MTAHP. MTAHP exhibited higher porosity and interface voids (p < 0.05). Conclusions: BIOC-R, MTAHP, and IRM are biocompatible. Bioceramics materials demonstrate bioactive potential. MTAHP presented the highest porosity and presence of voids. Clinical relevance: BIOC-R and MTAHP have adequate biological properties. BIOC-R demonstrated lower porosity and presence of voids, which may represent better sealing for its clinical applications.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?