本文選題：室溫固化型基托樹(shù)脂 + 加熱固化型基托樹(shù)脂　； 參考：《昆明醫(yī)科大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：[目的]檢測(cè)三種基托樹(shù)脂的細(xì)胞毒性,評(píng)價(jià)其生物相容性,為臨床材料使用提供依據(jù)。[方法]采用SRB法、流式細(xì)胞儀法檢測(cè)加熱固化型、室溫固化型、光固化型三種基托樹(shù)脂3天、7天浸提液對(duì)小鼠胚胎成纖維細(xì)胞L929的3天、7天細(xì)胞增殖率、細(xì)胞凋亡率的影響,評(píng)價(jià)比較三種基托樹(shù)的體外細(xì)胞毒性。[結(jié)果]1.室溫固化型基托樹(shù)脂:細(xì)胞增值率:反應(yīng)3天:3天浸提液為58.6%,7天浸提液為66.9%;細(xì)胞增殖0D值比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。反應(yīng)7天:3天浸提液為61.3%,7天浸提液為57.4%;細(xì)胞增值0D值比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。細(xì)胞凋亡率:反應(yīng)3天:3天浸提液為4.4%,7天浸提液為7.0%;反應(yīng)7天:3天浸提液為5.1%,7天浸提液為5.5%。2.加熱固化型基托樹(shù)脂:細(xì)胞增值率:反應(yīng)3天:3天浸提液為78.3%;7天浸提液為76.3%;細(xì)胞增殖OD比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。反應(yīng)7天:3天浸提液為76.4%;7天浸提液為75.7%;細(xì)胞增殖OD比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。細(xì)胞凋亡率:反應(yīng)3天:3天浸提液為3.1%;7天浸提液為5.9%;反應(yīng)7天:3天浸提液為3.1%;7天浸提液為3.3%。3.光固化型基托樹(shù)脂:細(xì)胞增殖率:反應(yīng)3天:3天浸提液為90.2%;7天浸提液為89.1%;細(xì)胞增殖OD比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。反應(yīng)7天:3天浸提液為90.0%;7天浸提液為88.8%;細(xì)胞增殖OD比較無(wú)統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.05)。細(xì)胞凋亡率:反應(yīng)3天:3天浸提液為2.2%;7天浸提液為4.7%;反應(yīng)7天:3天浸提液為2.8%;7天浸提液為2.5%。4.三種基托樹(shù)脂:細(xì)胞增值OD值:反應(yīng)3天:比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.01),其中兩兩相較均具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。反應(yīng)7天:比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P0.01),其中兩兩相較均具有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。[結(jié)論]1.室溫固化型基托樹(shù)脂細(xì)胞毒性為2級(jí),提示對(duì)細(xì)胞影響較大。2.加熱固化型基托樹(shù)脂細(xì)胞毒性為1級(jí),提示對(duì)細(xì)胞影響較小。3.光固化型基托樹(shù)脂細(xì)胞毒性為1級(jí),提示對(duì)細(xì)胞影響較小。
[Abstract]:Objective: to detect the cytotoxicity of three base resins and evaluate their biocompatibility.[methods] SRB assay and flow cytometry were used to detect the effects of heat curing, room temperature curing and light curing on the proliferation rate and apoptosis rate of mouse embryonic fibroblasts L929 at 3 days and 7 days.To evaluate and compare the cytotoxicity of three kinds of basilar trees in vitro.[result] 1.Room temperature curing base resin: cell proliferation rate: the ratio of cell proliferation was 58.6% in 3 days and 66.9 in 7 days, and the 0D value of cell proliferation was significantly higher than that of P0.05.On the 7th day of reaction, 61.3% of the extract was 61.3% and 57.4% on the 7th day, and the value of cell increment 0D was significantly higher than that of P0.05%.The apoptotic rate was 7.0 in the solution of 4. 4% and 7 days in the 3 days of reaction, and 5. 1 and 5. 2 in the solution of 5. 1 and 7 days after 7 days of reaction.Heating curing base resin: cell proliferation rate: the ratio of cell proliferation was 78.3% in 3 days and 78.3% in 7 days, and the OD ratio of cell proliferation was not significant (P 0.05).The ratio of cell proliferation OD to 75.7 was 75.7 in 7 days and 75.7 in 7days, and there was no significant difference in OD value of cell proliferation.The apoptotic rate was 3 days, 3 days, 3 days, 3 days, 7 days, 7 days, 3 days, 3 days, 3 days, 7 days, and 7 days, 3 days, 3 days, 3 days, 7 days, and 7 days, 3. 1 and 3. 5%, 3. 1%, 3. 3%, 3. 9%, 3. 9%, 3. 9%.Light curing base resin: cell proliferation rate: the ratio of cell proliferation was 90.2% in 3 days and 89.1 in 7 days, and the OD ratio of cell proliferation was not significant (P 0.05).The ratio of cell proliferation OD was not statistically significant (P 0.05), and the ratio of cell proliferation OD was 88. 8% in 7 days and 90. 0% in 7 days, and 90. 0% in 7 days, and 88. 8 in 7 days.The apoptotic rate was 2.7% in the solution of 2. 2% and 2. 7% in 3 days and 2. 5% in 7 days, and 2. 5% in 7 days, and 2. 5% in 7 days, and 2. 5% in 7 days, and 2. 5% in 7 days and 2. 5%. 4 in 7 days, and 2. 8% in 7 days, respectively.Three kinds of base resin: OD value of cell increment: reaction 3 days: the comparison was statistically significant (P 0.01), in which the two phases were statistically significant.The response was 7 days: there was statistical significance in the comparison of P 0.01 and P 0. 01, in which the pairings were statistically significant.[conclusion] 1.The cytotoxicity of the curing base resin at room temperature was 2 grade, indicating that the effect on the cell was greater. 2. 2.The cytotoxicity of the heat-cured base resin was grade 1, indicating that the effect on the cells was small. 3.The cytotoxicity of light curing base resin was grade 1, suggesting that it had little effect on cells.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：昆明醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：R783.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 俞懿強(qiáng);鄒德榮;蘇劍生;;紅外光譜儀檢測(cè)4種暫時(shí)冠材料的單體釋出特性[J];上�？谇会t(yī)學(xué);2008年06期

2 葉榮榮;沈慶平;喬廣艷;;3種臨床常用冠橋材料對(duì)體外培養(yǎng)鼠成纖維細(xì)胞毒性的比較[J];上海口腔醫(yī)學(xué);2008年03期

3 李巖;黃博;張少鋒;;甲基丙烯酸甲酯單體對(duì)小鼠肝、肺、腎功能的影響[J];實(shí)用口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2008年01期

4 蘇劍生;俞懿強(qiáng);張志升;喬廣艷;;不同材料暫時(shí)冠戴用后牙齦組織中Ki67、P53蛋白的表達(dá)[J];實(shí)用口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2006年05期

5 周思朗,屈艷妮,張健,汪森明,張積仁;SRB法與MTT法細(xì)胞計(jì)數(shù)應(yīng)用比較[J];中國(guó)現(xiàn)代醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2005年17期

6 于勇,章非敏,陸支越;3種暫時(shí)冠橋修復(fù)材料的臨床應(yīng)用研究[J];口腔醫(yī)學(xué);2004年03期

7 孫皎,高桑美代子,佐藤和子,佐藤溫重;復(fù)合樹(shù)指單體對(duì)人牙髓細(xì)胞毒性的研究[J];實(shí)用口腔醫(yī)學(xué)雜志;2000年04期

8 譚衛(wèi)東,金紅,羅弟祥,鐘紹東,蘇芝,彭旭東,高小平;抗腫瘤藥物篩選中MTT法和SRB法的比較[J];天然產(chǎn)物研究與開(kāi)發(fā);1999年03期

9 孫皎高,桑美代子,佐藤和子,佐藤溫重;中性紅染色法定量檢測(cè)牙科材料細(xì)胞毒性的研究[J];中國(guó)生物醫(yī)學(xué)工程學(xué)報(bào);1999年01期

10 余卓深;黃小明;韓玉芳;姚鳳家;江瑞洪;;可見(jiàn)光固化基托樹(shù)脂研究[J];口腔材料器械雜志;1993年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1766657