Search

Dental composite materials contain polymers of methacrylates, which, due to mechanical abrasion and enzymatic action of saliva, may release their monomers into oral cavity and the pulp. Moreover, polymerization is always incomplete and leaves usually considerable fraction of free monomers. Mechanisms of the genotoxicity of methacrylate monomers have been rarely explored. As the polymerization of a monomer is catalyzed by a co-monomer, their combined action should be considered. In the present work, we investigated cytotoxic and genotoxic effects of urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA), often used as a monomer, at 1 mM, and triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA), a typical co-monomer, at 5 mM singly and in combination. Experiments were conducted on Chinese hamster ovary cells. Cell viability, apoptosis and cell cycle were assessed by flow cytometry, whereas DNA damage was evaluated by plasmid conformation test and comet assay. Both compounds decreased the viability of the cells, but did not induce strand breaks in an isolated plasmid DNA. However, both substances, either singly or in combination, damaged DNA in CHO cells as evaluated by comet assay. Both compounds induced apoptosis, but a combined action of them led to a decrease in the number of apoptotic cells. The combined action of UDMA and TEGDMA in the disturbance of cell cycle was lesser compared to the action of each compound individually. Individually, though UDMA and TEGDMA may induce cytotoxic and genotoxic, however, a combination of both does not produce a significant increase in these effects.

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.