Abstract
Introduction
Stem
cell technology has been a great hope for the regeneration of cells of
pulp-dentin complex and dental structures together with surrounding bone
and periodontium. The main challenge in the regeneration process is a
successful combination of stem cells and efficient inductors such as
inductive biomaterials. In this regard, today, manufacturers propose
novel tooth filling materials. The current study was aimed to compare
the effect of ProRoot MTA (Dentsply Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK), Biodentine
(Septodont, Saint Maur des Fossés, France), and MM-MTA (Micro-Mega,
Besançon Cedex, France) on the cell viability, hard tissue deposition
capacity, and osteogenic differentiation of human bone marrow stem cells
(hBMSCs) derived from mandibular bone.
Methods
Dental
materials were packed into Teflon rings (Grover Corp, Milwaukee, WI)
and placed on Transwell inserts (Corning, Corning, NY) to determine the
toxicity of tooth filling materials by the
3-(4,5-dimethyl-thiazol-2-yl)-5-(3-carboxy-methoxy-phenyl)-2-(4-sulfo-phenyl)-2H
tetrazolium assay on days 1, 3, 7, and 14; 20% dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO) was used as a positive control for the toxicity assay. hBMSCs
were characterized by their surface markers with mesenchymal stem cell
antibodies. Teflon rings were cocultured with hBMSCs followed by the
induction of osteogenic differentiation. The osteogenic differentiation
of hBMSCs and hard tissue formation of the materials were evaluated by
analyzing the messenger RNA expression levels of osteonectin,
Runt-related transcription factor 2, and collagen type 1A by real-time
polymerase chain reaction expression analysis, measurement of alkaline
phosphatase activity, and visualization of calcium deposits by alizarin
red staining.
Results
MTA,
Biodentine, and MM-MTA did not exhibit a cytotoxic effect on hBMSCs
after 14 days in culture. Even though all the materials significantly
stimulate (
P < .05) osteogenic differentiation of hBMSCs
compared with the negative control, ProRoot MTA showed greater
osteoinductivity than Biodentine or MM-MTA according to the messenger
RNA expression, alkaline phosphatase, immunocytochemistry, and alizarin
red staining data.
Conclusions
All of
the dental materials used in this study show the osteogenic
differentiation potential of hBMSCs. Therefore, newly introduced MM-MTA
can also be used as a material of choice in routine dental treatment.
Comments