1.Cytotoxic effects of different self-adhesive resin cements: Cell viability and induction of apoptosis
Soner ŞIŞMANOĞLU ; Mustafa DEMIRCI ; Helmut SCHWEIKL ; Gunes OZEN-EROGLU ; Esin CETIN-AKTAS ; Serap KURUCA ; Safa TUNCER ; Neslihan TEKCE
The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics 2020;12(2):89-99
PURPOSE:
. The effects of four different self-adhesive resin cement materials on cell viability and apoptosis after direct and indirect exposure were evaluated using different cell culture techniques.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
. Self-adhesive cements were applied to NIH/3T3 mouse fibroblasts by the extract test method, cell culture inserts, and dentin barrier test method. After exposure periods of 24 h and 72 h, the cytotoxicity of these self-adhesive materials was evaluated using the MTT assay (viability) and the Annexin-V-FITC/PI staining (apoptosis).
RESULTS:
.The lowest cell viability was found in cells exposed to BeautiCem SA for 24 h in the extract test method. Cell viability was reduced to 70.6% compared to negative controls. After the 72 h exposure period, viability rate of cell cultures exposed to BeautiCem SA decreased more than 2- fold (29.5%) while cells exposed to RelyX U200 showed the highest viability rate of 71.4%. In the dentin barrier test method, BeautiCem SA induced the highest number of cells in apoptosis after a 24 h exposure (4.1%). Panavia SA Cement Plus was the material that caused the lowest number of cells in apoptosis (1.5%).
CONCLUSION
. The used self-adhesive cements have showed different cytotoxic effects based on the evaluation method. As exposure time increased, the materials showed more cytotoxic and apoptotic effects. BeautiCem SA caused significantly more severe cytotoxic and apoptotic effects than other cements tested. Moreover, cements other than BeautiCem SA have caused necrotic cell death rather than apoptotic cell death.
2.Usefulness of In Vivo and In Vitro Diagnostic Tests in the Diagnosis of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Quinolones and in the Evaluation of Cross-Reactivity: A Comprehensive Study Including the Latest Quinolone Gemifloxacin.
Semra DEMIR ; Asli GELINCIK ; Nilgun AKDENIZ ; Esin AKTAS-CETIN ; Muge OLGAC ; Derya UNAL ; Belkis ERTEK ; Raif COSKUN ; Bahattin COLAKOĞLU ; Gunnur DENIZ ; Suna BUYUKOZTURK
Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research 2017;9(4):347-359
PURPOSE: Reports evaluating diagnosis and cross reactivity of quinolone hypersensitivity have revealed contradictory results. Furthermore, there are no reports investigating the cross-reactivity between gemifloxacin (GFX) and the others. We aimed to detect the usefulness of diagnostic tests of hypersensitivity reactions to quinolones and to evaluate the cross reactivity between different quinolones including the latest quinolone GFX. METHODS: We studied 54 patients (mean age 42.31±10.39 years; 47 female) with 57 hypersensitivity reactions due to different quinolones and 10 nonatopic quinolone tolerable control subjects. A detailed clinical history, skin test (ST), and single-blind placebo-controlled drug provocation test (SBPCDPT), as well as basophil activation test (BAT) and lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) were performed with the culprit and alternative quinolones including ciprofloxacin (CFX), moxifloxacin (MFX), levofloxacin (LFX), ofloxacin (OFX), and GFX. RESULTS: The majority (75.9%) of the patients reported immediate type reactions to various quinolones. The most common culprit drug was CFX (52.6%) and the most common reaction type was urticaria (26.3%). A quarter of the patients (24.1%) reacted to SBPCDPTs, although their STs were negative; while false ST positivity was 3.5% and ST/SBPCDPTs concordance was only 1.8%. Both BAT and LTT were not found useful in quinolone hypersensitivity. Cross-reactivity was primarily observed between LFX and OFX (50.0%), whereas it was the least between MFX and the others, and in GFX hypersensitive patients the degree of cross-reactivity to the other quinolones was 16.7%. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that STs, BAT, and LTT are not supportive in the diagnosis of a hypersensitivity reaction to quinolone as well as in the prediction of cross-reactivity. Drug provocation tests (DPTs) are necessary to identify both culprit and alternative quinolones.
Basophils
;
Ciprofloxacin
;
Diagnosis*
;
Diagnostic Tests, Routine*
;
Humans
;
Hypersensitivity*
;
In Vitro Techniques*
;
Levofloxacin
;
Lymphocyte Activation
;
Ofloxacin
;
Quinolones*
;
Skin Tests
;
Urticaria
3.An unusual dual hypersensitivity reaction to moxifloxacin in a patient
Semra DEMIR ; Derya UNAL ; Muge OLGAC ; Nilgun AKDENIZ ; Esin AKTAS-CETIN ; Asli GELINCIK ; Bahauddin COLAKOGLU ; Suna BUYUKOZTURK
Asia Pacific Allergy 2018;8(3):e26-
Both immediate and nonimmediate type hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) with a single dose of quinolone in the same patient have not been previously reported. A 47-year-old female patient referred to us because of the history of a nonimmediate type HR to radio contrast agent and immediate type HR to clarithromycin. She experienced anaphylaxis in minutes after the second dose of 50 mg when she was provocated with moxifloxacin. She was treated immediately with epinephrine, fluid replacement and methylprednisole and pheniramine. On the following day she came with macular eruptions, and she was treated with methylprednisolone. The positive patch test performed with moxifloxacin as well as the lymphocyte transformation test proved the T-cell mediated HR. In order to prove the immediate type HR, basophil activation test was performed but was found negative. This case report presents for the first time the 2 different types of HRs in a patient with a test dose of quinolone.
Anaphylaxis
;
Basophils
;
Clarithromycin
;
Epinephrine
;
Female
;
Humans
;
Hypersensitivity
;
Lymphocyte Activation
;
Methylprednisolone
;
Middle Aged
;
Patch Tests
;
Pheniramine
;
T-Lymphocytes