title: The impact of pH on cytotoxic effects of three root canal irrigants.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Cytotoxicity of root canal irrigants is important due to their close contact with host tissues. This study was to assess the possible impact of pH on cytotoxic effects of MTAD, 17% EDTA, and 2.6% NaOCl on the human gingival fibroblasts using MTT assay.
  
  
  METHODS
  Human gingival fibroblasts were exposed to the irrigants and their viability was assessed after 1, 6, and 12 h. The pH of the medium was measured in each interval. Light absorption values were measured for each culture medium using Elisa Reader device.
  
  
  RESULTS
  NaOCl had significantly less cytotoxicity than EDTA and MTAD. Also irrigants cytotoxicity decreased in 12, 1, and 6 h, respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  It seems that variation of the pH resulted in variation in the cytotoxicity of solutions; i.e., it follows the pattern of the pH variation.
authors: Department of Dental Material, Islamic Azad University (Dental Branch), Tehran, Iran.
authors: Mohammad Ali
authors: MA
authors: Saghiri
authors: Abbas
authors: A
authors: Delvarani
authors: Payman
authors: P
authors: Mehrvarzfar
authors: Mohsen
authors: M
authors: Nikoo
authors: Mehrdad
authors: M
authors: Lotfi
authors: Kasra
authors: K
authors: Karamifar
authors: Kamal
authors: K
authors: Asgar
authors: Sahar
authors: S
authors: Dadvand
keywords: Cytotoxicity; Ethylene diaminetetra acetic acid; MTAD; Sodium hypochlorite; pH
references: Braz Dent J. 1995;6(2):85-90
references: 8688662
references: Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1985 Jul;28(1):118-22
references: 3929674
references: Braz Dent J. 1992;2(2):123-7
references: 1290911
references: J Endod. 2000 Oct;26(10):586-7
references: 11199798
references: J Endod. 2003 Oct;29(10):654-7
references: 14606789
references: Aust Dent J. 1986 Oct;31(5):364-8
references: 3030248
references: Br Med J. 1915 Aug 28;2(2852):318-20
references: 20767784
references: J Endod. 1999 Jan;25(1):21-3
references: 10196838
references: J Endod. 1999 May;25(5):354-8
references: 10530261
references: J Endod. 2006 Nov;32(11):1091-3
references: 17055914
references: Br J Cancer. 1993 Mar;67(3):493-9
references: 8439499
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1961 Jun;14:730-47
references: 13777518
references: J Endod. 2010 Feb;36(2):260-3
references: 20113785
references: Int Endod J. 1982 Oct;15(4):187-96
references: 6964523
references: J Endod. 2006 Mar;32(3):218-21
references: 16500230
references: J Immunol Methods. 1983 Dec 16;65(1-2):55-63
references: 6606682
references: J Endod. 2006 May;32(5):389-98
references: 16631834
references: J Endod. 2008 Apr;34(4):449-52
references: 18358894
references: J Endod. 2003 May;29(5):334-7
references: 12775005
references: Int Endod J. 2002 Sep;35(9):735-9
references: 12449023
references: Int Endod J. 1997 Jul;30(4):279-82
references: 9477814
references: Odontol Revy. 1972;23(2):205-10
references: 4504494
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2002 Dec;94(6):756-62
references: 12464903
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1973 Dec;36(6):856-71
references: 4208832
references: Int Endod J. 1981 May;14(2):115-20
references: 6940582
references: Exp Cell Res. 1983 Jun;146(1):151-61
references: 6305691
references: J Appl Bacteriol. 1979 Feb;46(1):65-73
references: 35510
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Jul 23;99(15):9727-32
references: 12105274
references: Int Endod J. 1994 Jan;27(1):6-10
references: 7806414
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1963 Jan;16:83-103
references: 13941916