Effect of Yellow Propolis on Biocompatibility of Cements: Morphological and Immunohistochemistry Analysis

Abstract

Objective The focus of this study was to evaluate the biocompatibility of ionomer cements modified with ethanolic extracts of propolis (EEP) in different concentrations and time intervals. Materials and Methods In total, one hundred and thirty-five male Wistar rats were randomized into nine groups: Control, Groups Meron, and Groups Ketac (conventional, and added with 10, 25, 50% EEP, respectively). Histological analyses of inflammatory infiltrate and collagen fibers, and immunohistochemistry of CD68+ for macrophages (MOs) and multinucleated giant cells (MGCs) were performed. Statistical Analysis Data were analyzed using the Kruskal—Wallis and Dunn (p < 0.05) tests. Results Intense inflammatory infiltrate was demonstrated in the cements with 10% EEP at 7 days and 15 days (p < 0.05), only Group Ketac 10% EEP (p = 0.01) at 30 days. A smaller quantity of collagen fibers was observed in the cements with 10% EEP (p = 0.01) at 7 days, and Group Meron 10% EEP (p = 0.04) at 15 days. MOs and MGCs showed significant difference for the cements with 10% EEP (p = 0.01) at 7 and 15 days. At 30 days, MOs persisted in the Groups with 10% EEP. Conclusions The concentration of 10% EEP had the greatest influence on the inflammatory and tissue repair processes. The concentrations of 25 and 50% EEP demonstrated biocompatibility similar to that of cements that did not receive EEP.

The Suitability of Propolis as a Bioactive Component of Biomaterials

“…It was postulated that the inflammatory response was driven by the relatively higher ethanol concentration in the 10% propolis-GIC composites. The overall trend observed in the study was that the inflammatory histological changes were inversely correlated with the concentrations of the propolis in propolis-GIC composites ( Meneses et al, 2020 ; De Meneses et al, 2021 ).…”

Analysis of Tissue Repair of a New Cement Based on Calcium and Strontium Aluminates: A Triple-Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial in an Animal Model

“…The filling material was introduced into the openings at the extremities of the tubes using a syringe (Centrix, Connecticut, United States) supported on a glass slide at one end and a small glass slide at the other to flatten the material. 23 24 25 Each cement was placed in a polyethylene tube 10 mm in length and 1.5 mm in diameter, with the exception of the tubes used in the control group, which were implanted and left empty. 24 The sealer cement, based on calcium silicate, was manipulated according to the manufacturer's specifications.…”

“…27 After the sampling periods, the animals were sedated with ketamine hydrochloride (0.10 mL/kg, Vetnil, Vetecia, SP, Brazil), 2% xylazine hydrochloride (0.1 mL/kg, União Química, SP, Brazil), and 0.9% sodium chloride (0.15 mL/kg, Fresenius Kabi, Barueri, SP, Brazil) and sacrificed by cervical dislocation. 24 28 Euthanasia was confirmed by observing the absence of the eyelid reflex, chest movements, and heartbeat for 3 minutes.…”

“…material. [23][24][25] Each cement was placed in a polyethylene tube 10 mm in length and 1.5 mm in diameter, with the exception of the tubes used in the control group, which were implanted and left empty. 24 The sealer cement, based on calcium silicate, was manipulated according to the manufacturer's specifications.…”

Incorporation of Nanomaterials in Glass Ionomer Cements—Recent Developments and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review

“…This aspect has been covered by several works published over several decades [ 23 , 24 , 25 ], with classical GICs being identified as less toxic compared with resin-modified or ceramic-reinforced GICs [ 25 ]. In order to preserve this important feature, the development of modified GICs should primarily consider the addition of biocompatible materials [ 26 ], or, at least, the influence of the added materials on final biocompatibility should be studied [ 27 , 28 ].…”