Cytotoxicity of silicone materials used in maxillofacial prosthesis / dental implant courses by Indian dental academy

Cytotoxicity ofCytotoxicity of
Commercially AvailableCommercially Available
Silicone Material UsedSilicone Material Used
for Maxillofacialfor Maxillofacial
ProsthesisProsthesis
www.indiandentalaacademy.comwww.indiandentalaacademy.com
INDIAN DENTAL ACADEMY
Leader in continuing Dental Education

IntroductionIntroduction

Purpose of the StudyPurpose of the Study
 The purpose of this study was to
qualitatively assess the potential
cytotoxicity of various (Biomed and
Realistic) commercially available
silicon materials used vastly for
maxillofacial prosthesis in prosthetic
dentistry.

Materials & MethodMaterials & Method
A metallic die with diameter
-28mm and depth - 2mm was
fabricated to standardize the
samples.
Realistic and Biomed silicone
materials.
Two commercially available materials Biomed and Realistic
were used to evaluate cytotoxicity.

Realistic groupBiomed group
Five samples for each group were fabricated.

Pressure gauge indicating the
pressure applied
Autoclave unit
All the samples of both groups were sterilized in autoclave at 121°C at 10
pounds of pressure for 30 minutes.
The autoclave has an outer jet and an inner jet.
First the pressure is created in the outer jet and then transferred in the
inner jet.

Cells and MediumCells and Medium
Syrian hamster; kidney cells
in fetal bovine serum Eagle’s Minimum Essential
Medium (MEM)
MEM is a complex media which contains a large number of amino
acids and vitamins and is often supplemented with extra
metabolites and minerals

Selection of medium for serumSelection of medium for serum
 There are few good guidelines for selection of
appropriate medium for a given cell type, but it is
based on:-
1) Literature or source of cells.
2) Otherwise choice is either empirical or by
comparative testing of several media.

Cells and MediumCells and Medium
 Syrian hamster; kidney cells were used.
They were grown in Eagle’s Minimum
Essential Medium (MEM) with 2mM
L-glutamine and Earle’s BSS adjusted to
contain 1.5g/L Na bicarbonate, 0.1mM
non-essential amino acids, and 1.0mM Na
pyruvate, 90% fetal calf serum.

Procedure to measure cellProcedure to measure cell
cytotoxicitycytotoxicity
 These samples were divided into three
groups:
1. Control group.
2. Realistic group.
3. Biomed group.

 Control group – In this only the MEM
(Eagle’s medium) and hamster kidney
cells were taken
Petri dish showing the control
group

Biomed group Realistic group.
 The silicon material samples were placed in
the culture media. Then the media was
removed by aspiration and placed in the
vials. The cells were transferred to the vials.

 The LAMINAR FLOWHOOD works on a function
of HEPA (High efficiency particulate air) to make the air
sterile.
 The microbiologist is working under LAMINAR
FLOWHOOD which is a sterilized chamber to maintain
the non microbial environment.
 Here the microbiologist is transferring the Syrian hamster;
kidney cell line to the culture media.

 Incubation vials
with the samples
after transferring
the cell lines

Incubator with the vials
 Samples were innoculated with cell lines and were
incubated for 3 days at 37°C and 5% carbon
dioxide atmosphere.

 The optimal temperature for the incubation is
dependent on three factors:-
1) Body temperature of the animal from which
the cells are obtained.
2) Any regional variation eg. cells from the skin.
3) Incorporation of safety factor to allow minor
errors in incubator regulation.

 Cytotoxicity was observed by recording any change
in the morphologies of the syrian hamster kidney
cells (with the help of the OLYMPUS phase contrast
microscope) as compared with the controls and the
results from these 3 groups were recorded and
scored for each sample on a 0 - 4+T scale:
 0  no cytotoxicity
 1+T  1-25% effect
 2+T  25%-50% effect
 3+T  50%-75% effect on cells
 4+T  75%-100% destruction of the cell

 OLYMPUS phase contrast microscope

ObservationsObservations
 Whirlpool pattern
arrangement of
syrian kidney cells
can be seen in the
control group under
the phase contrast
microscope
appearance
Without filter
With filterwww.indiandentalaacademy.comwww.indiandentalaacademy.com

Micrographic view of Biomed group
after incubation shows morphological
damage of culture cells

Micrographic view of Realistic group
after incubation shows morphological
damage of culture cells

ResultsResults
GROUPGROUP CYTOTOXICITYCYTOTOXICITY
ControlControl 00
RealisticRealistic 11
BiomedBiomed 11

Clinical ImplicationsClinical Implications
 The probability of allergic or toxic reactions
from silicon materials or their components is
small but the following test results show that
the potential exists.
 The perceptive practitioner will be alert to
the subtle signs of tissue response that may
manifest itself with the use of silicon
materials.

DiscussionDiscussion
DiscussionDiscussion

LimitationsLimitations
 The sample size was less.
 It was the qualitative not the quantitative test.
 Only one method to evaluate the cytotoxicity was
done.
 Other methods to evaluate cytotoxicity such as
cell viability, cell culture agarose overlay tests can
be done to correlate the results.

Cytotoxicity of silicone materials used in maxillofacial prosthesis / dental implant courses by Indian dental academy

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Cytotoxicity of silicone materials used in maxillofacial prosthesis / dental implant courses by Indian dental academy

Similar to Cytotoxicity of silicone materials used in maxillofacial prosthesis / dental implant courses by Indian dental academy (20)

More from Indian dental academy

More from Indian dental academy (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Cytotoxicity of silicone materials used in maxillofacial prosthesis / dental implant courses by Indian dental academy