Inflammatory and immunohistochemical evaluation of bioceramic repair materials after pulpotomy: study in wistar rats

• Autor(a) principal: Valentim, Diego
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Outros Autores: Bueno, Carlos Roberto Emerenciano, Vasques, Ana Maria Veiga, Benetti, Francine, Cury, Marina Tolomei Sandoval, Silva , Ana Claudia Rodrigues da, Jacinto, Rogerio Castilho, Sivieri Araújo, Gustavo, Gomes-Filho, Joao Eduardo, Ervolino, Edilson, Cintra, Luciano Tavares Angelo, Dezan-Junior, Eloi
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Research, Society and Development
• Texto Completo: https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/18480
• topic: Pulpotomy; Inflammation; Materials Testing; Endodontics.; Pulpotomía; Inflamación; Ensayo de Materiales; Endodoncia.; Pulpotomia; Inflamação; Teste de Materiais; Endodontia.

Pulpotomy is an alternative of conservative treatment which aims to preserve pulp vitality within root portion, with the aid of biocompatible materials on this remaining living tissue. This study aimed to evaluate the biological response of the pulp remnant to Biodentine® and white Angelus MTA® bioceramic repair cements compared to calcium hydroxide after pulpotomy. Twenty-four male rats had the coronary pulps of the first and second molars exposed and removed with a sharp curette. The remaining pulp tissue received one of the experimental materials: Biodentine®, white Angelus MTA® or Ca(OH)2 + distilled water and sealed with glass ionomer. One group was sealed directly with glass ionomer as a negative control group. After 7 and 15 days, the animals were euthanized and the pieces submitted to histological processing to evaluate the inflammatory process with HE staining and immunohistochemistry (Fibronectin and Tenascin), through the attribution of scores from 1 to 4. Formation of hard tissue bridging was observed in HE staining, evaluating presence, continuity and morphology. Data were submitted to the Kruskal Wallis and Dunn test (p<0.05). Statistical analysis showed that at 7 days MTA and Ca(OH)2 had greater hard tissue bridge continuity than glass ionomer (p<0.05). Biodentine® showed better morphological aspects compared to glass ionomer (p<0.05). At 15 days, MTA and Biodentine® showed complete hard tissue bridge (p<0.05). For immunostaining, Biodentine® obtained greater marking than the glass ionomer for Fibronectin and Tenascin. Biodentine®, white MTA Angelus® and calcium hydroxide showed the ability to induce mineralization according to the applied methodology. However, Biodentine® showed superior tissue response than glass ionomer and calcium hydroxide.