Are there Risks from Nanocomposite Restoration Grinding for Dentists?

To evaluate the effect of short-term inhalational exposure to nanoparticles released during dental composite grinding on oxidative stress and antioxidant capacity markers. Twenty-four healthy volunteers were examined before and after exposure in dental workshop. They spent 76.8 ± 0.7 min in the test...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International dental journal
Main Authors: Pelclova, Daniela, Bradna, Pavel, Lischkova, Lucie, Zdimal, Vladimir, Maskova, Ludmila, Klusackova, Pavlina, Kolesnikova, Viktoriia, Ondracek, Jakub, Schwarz, Jaroslav, Pohanka, Miroslav, Navratil, Tomas, Vlckova, Stepanka, Fenclova, Zdenka, Duskova, Jana, Rossnerova, Andrea, Roubickova, Adela
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: England Elsevier Inc 25-07-2024
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To evaluate the effect of short-term inhalational exposure to nanoparticles released during dental composite grinding on oxidative stress and antioxidant capacity markers. Twenty-four healthy volunteers were examined before and after exposure in dental workshop. They spent 76.8 ± 0.7 min in the testing room during grinding of dental nanocomposites. The individual exposure to aerosol particles in each participant´s breathing zones was monitored using a personal nanoparticle sampler (PENS). Exhaled breath condensate (EBC), blood, and urine samples were collected pre- and post-exposure to measure one oxidative stress marker, i.e., thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), and two biomarkers of antioxidant capacity, i.e., ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) and reduced glutathione (GSH) by spectrophotometry. Spirometry and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) were used to evaluate the effect of acute inhalational exposure. Mean mass of dental nanocomposite ground away was 0.88 ± 0.32 g. Average individual doses of respirable particles and nanoparticles measured by PENS were 380 ± 150 and 3.3 ± 1.3 μg, respectively. No significant increase of the post-exposure oxidative stress marker TBARS in EBC and plasma was seen. No decrease in antioxidant capacity biomarkers FRAP and GSH in EBC post-exposure was seen, either. Post-exposure, conjunctival hyperemia was seen in 62.5% volunteers; however, no impairment in spirometry or FeNO results was observed. No correlation of any biomarker measured with individual exposure was found, however, several correlations with interfering factors (age, body mass index, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and environmental pollution parameters) were seen. This study, using oxidative stress biomarker and antioxidant capacity biomarkers in biological fluids of volunteers during the grinding of dental nanocomposites did not prove a negative effect of this intense short-term exposure. However, further studies are needed to evaluate oxidative stress in long-term exposure of both stomatologists and patients and diverse populations with varying health statuses.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0020-6539
1875-595X
1875-595X
DOI:10.1016/j.identj.2024.05.007