2-Hydroxylethyl methacrylate (HEMA), a tooth restoration component, exerts its genotoxic effects in human gingival fibroblasts trough methacrylic acid, an immediate product of its degradation

HEMA (2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate), a methacrylate commonly used in dentistry, was reported to induce genotoxic effects, but their mechanism is not fully understood. HEMA may be degraded by the oral cavity esterases or through mechanical stress following the chewing process. Methacrylic acid (MAA) is the primary product of HEMA degradation. In the present work we compared cytotoxic and genotoxic effects induced by HEMA and MAA in human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs). A 6-h exposure to HEMA or MAA induced a weak decrease in the viability of HGFs. Neither HEMA nor MAA induced strand breaks in the isolated plasmid DNA, but both compounds evoked DNA damage in HGFs, as evaluated by the alkaline comet assay. Oxidative modifications to the DNA bases were monitored by the DNA repair enzymes Endo III and Fpg. DNA damage induced by HEMA and MAA was not persistent and was removed during a 120 min repair incubation. Results from the neutral comet assay indicated that both compounds induced DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) and they were confirmed by the γ-H2AX assay. Both compounds induced apoptosis and perturbed the cell cycle. Therefore, methacrylic acid, a product of HEMA degradation, may be involved in its cytotoxic and genotoxic action

Effect of different light-curing devices and aging procedures on composite knoop microhardness

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of light-curing devices (Halogen/HAL, Light Emitting Diodes/LED, Argon Laser/LAS and Plasma Arc/PAC) and aging procedures (Mechanical Cycling/MC, Thermal Cycling/TC, Storage/S, MC+TC and MC+TC+S) on the micro-hardness of bottom/B and top/T surfaces of 2-mm-high composite resin cylinders. The Knoop microhardness test (25 g, 20 s) on both B and T was performed before and after each aging procedure. For B and T, before aging procedures, PAC showed reduced polymerization effectiveness when compared with HAL. In the T, after TC, PAC and LAS had also showed reduced polymerization effectiveness when compared to HAL and LED. For all light-curing devices, MC+TC+S and S affected the Knoop microhardness values. In the B, no difference could be observed among the aging procedures for PAC. From all light-curing units, PAC may have rendered composites of reduced quality and the storage aging procedures were the most harmful to the polymer hardness