Basic Research| Volume 40, ISSUE 11, P1869-1873, November 2014

Download started.


Biocompatibility of a Self-adhesive Gutta-percha–based Material in Subcutaneous Tissue of Mice

Published:September 01, 2014DOI:


      • Bioactive gutta-percha was more biocompatible than conventional gutta-percha at each experimental time interval
      • The better tissue reactions promoted by bioactive gutta-percha might be explained by the presence of bioactive particles
      • Bioactive particles allows the precipitation of calcium phosphate at the material's surface forming a mineralized layer
      • To the present date, no study assessed the biological properties of this self-adhesive gutta-percha based material



      The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biocompatibility of a self-adhesive gutta-percha material and compare it with that of conventional gutta-percha.


      Standard quantities of bioactive gutta-percha and conventional gutta-percha were directly inserted subcutaneously into the dorsal connective tissue of 30 BALB/c mice according to ISO 10993-6. After 7, 21, and 63 days each, 10 animals were euthanized, and the materials and surrounding tissue were removed. Tissue samples were subjected to histological processing resulting in 5-μm-thick slices stained with hematoxylin-eosin and Gomori trichrome stain. A grade ranging from I–IV was used to classify the inflammatory reaction. The Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction was used to compare the grade of inflammation induced by the materials at each time point. Qualitative evaluation of biocompatibility over time was also performed.


      Bioactive gutta-percha was more biocompatible than conventional gutta-percha at each time interval (P < .05). Tissue exposed to bioactive gutta-percha reached “no inflammation” (grade I) at the 21-day interval, whereas it took 63 days for the conventional gutta-percha to reach the “slight inflammation” level (grade II).


      Bioactive gutta-percha presented good tissue reaction at all time points. It may serve as an alternative to gutta-percha in terms of biocompatibility.

      Key Words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Endodontics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Anthony L.P.
        • Grossman L.I.
        A brief history of root-canal therapy in the United States.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 1945; 32: 43-50
        • Pascon E.A.
        • Spangberg L.S.
        In vitro cytotoxicity of root canal filling materials: 1. Gutta-percha.
        J Endod. 1990; 16: 429-433
        • Tay F.R.
        • Pashley D.H.
        Monoblocks in root canals: a hypothetical or a tangible goal.
        J Endod. 2007; 33: 391-398
        • Marending M.
        • Bubenhofer S.B.
        • Sener B.
        • et al.
        Primary assessment of a self-adhesive gutta-percha material.
        Int Endod J. 2013; 46: 317-322
        • Mohn D.
        • Zender M.
        • Imfeld T.
        • et al.
        Radio-opaque nanosized bioactive glass for potential root canal application: evaluation of radiopacity, bioactivity and alkaline capacity.
        Int Endod J. 2010; 43: 210-217
        • Mohn D.
        • Bruhin C.
        • Luechinger N.A.
        • et al.
        Composites made of flame-sprayed bioactive glass 45S5 and polymers: bioactivity and immediate sealing properties.
        Int Endod J. 2010; 43: 1037-1046
        • Ricucci D.
        • Langeland K.
        Apical limit of root canal instrumentation and obturation: part 2—a histological study.
        Int Endod J. 1998; 31: 394-409
        • Khashaba R.M.
        • Moussa M.M.
        • Chuktan N.B.
        • et al.
        The response of subcutaneous connective tissue to newly developed calcium phosphate-based root canal sealers.
        Int Endod J. 2011; 44: 342-352
        • Sousa C.J.A.
        • Montes C.R.M.
        • Pascon E.A.
        • et al.
        Comparison of the intraosseus biocompatibility of AH Plus, EndoREZ, and Epiphany root canal sealers.
        J Endod. 2006; 32: 656-662
        • Economides N.
        • Kotsaki-Kovatsi V.P.
        • Poulopoulos A.
        • et al.
        Experimental study of the biocompatibility of four root canal sealers and their influence on the zinc and calcium content several tissues.
        J Endod. 1995; 21: 122-127
        • Bernath M.
        • Szabo J.
        Tissue reaction initiated by different sealers.
        Int Endod J. 2003; 36: 256-261
        • Hauman C.H.
        • Love R.M.
        Biocompatibility of dental materials used in contemporary endodontic therapy: a review—part 2: root-canal-filling materials.
        Int Endod J. 2003; 36: 147-160
        • Sousa C.J.A.
        • Loyola A.M.
        • Versiani M.A.
        • et al.
        A comparative histological evaluation of the biocompatibility of materials used in apical surgery.
        Int Endod J. 2004; 37: 738-748
        • Campos-Pinto M.M.D.
        • Oliveira D.A.
        • Silva-Sousa Y.T.C.
        • et al.
        Assessment of the biocompatibility of Epiphany root canal sealer in rat subcutaneous tissues.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008; 105: e77-e81
        • Shahi S.
        • Rahimi S.
        • Lotfi M.
        • et al.
        A comparative study of the biocompatibility of three root-end filling materials in rat connective tissue.
        J Endod. 2006; 32: 776-780
        • Mitchel D.F.
        The irritational qualities of dental materials.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 1959; 598: 954-966
        • Huang F.M.
        • Tsai C.H.
        • Yang S.F.
        • et al.
        Induction of interleukin-6 and interleukin-8 gene expression by root canal sealers in human osteoblastic cells.
        J Endod. 2005; 31: 679-683
        • Eid A.A.
        • Nikonov S.Y.
        • Looney S.W.
        • et al.
        In Vitro biocompatibility evaluation of a root canal filling material that expands on water sorption.
        J Endod. 2013; 39: 883-888
        • Garcia L.F.R.
        • Marques A.A.F.
        • Roselino L.M.R.
        • et al.
        Biocompatibility evaluation of Epiphany/Resilon root canal filling system in subcutaneous tissue of rats.
        J Endod. 2010; 36: 110-114
        • Zmener O.
        Tissue response to a new methacrylate-based root canal sealer: preliminary observations in the subcutaneous connective tissue of rats.
        J Endod. 2004; 30: 348-351
        • Olsson B.
        • Slikowski A.
        • Langeland K.
        Subcutaneous implantation for the biological evaluation of endodontic materials.
        J Endod. 1981; 7: 355-369
        • Lalis R.M.
        • Esaín M.L.
        • Kokubu G.A.
        • et al.
        Rat subcutaneous tissue response to modified Portland cement, a new mineral trioxide aggregate.
        Braz Dent J. 2009; 20: 112-117
        • Onay E.O.
        • Ungor M.
        • Ozdemir B.H.
        In vivo evaluation of the biocompatibility of a new resin-based obturation system.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2007; 104: e60-e66
        • Bodrumlu E.
        • Muglali M.
        • Sumer M.
        • et al.
        The response of subcutaneous connective tissue to a new endodontic filling material.
        J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater. 2008; 84B: 463-467
        • International Organization for Standardization
        ISO 10993 Biological evaluation of medical devices—Part 6: Tests for Local Effects after Implantation.
        International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland2007
        • Sanders J.E.
        • Rochefort J.R.
        Fibrous encapsulation of single polymer depends on their vertical dimension in subcutaneous tissue.
        J Biomed Mater Res. 2003; 67: 1181-1187
        • Cox C.F.
        • Subay R.K.
        • Suzuki S.
        • et al.
        Biocompatibility of various dental materials, pulp healing with a surface seal.
        Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1996; 16: 241-251
        • Robbins S.L.
        • Cortan R.S.
        • Kumar V.
        Pocket Compaction to Robbins Pathologic Basis of Disease.
        6th ed. WB Saunders, Philadelphia1991: 46-56
        • Marciano J.
        • Michailesco P.M.
        Dental gutta-percha: chemical composition, X-ray identification, enthalpic studies, and clinical implications.
        J Endod. 1989; 15: 149-153
        • Wolfson E.M.
        • Seltzer S.
        Reaction of rat connective tissue to some gutta-percha formulations.
        J Endod. 1975; 1: 395-402