Submitted: 29 Mar 2020
Revision: 03 May 2020
Accepted: 31 May 2020
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)

  Abstract View: 27

Research Article

Effect of two commercial acellular dermal scaffolds on biological behavior of human gingival fibroblasts

Omid Moghaddas* ORCID logo, Behdokht Miremadi, Ehsan Seyedjafari


Background: Periodontal regeneration is a major goal of periodontal therapy. Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been recommended as an alternative to autogenous graft. However, since it is devoid of cells and vasculature, some concerns exist regarding the biological behavior of cells on ADM. This study aimed to assess the effect of two commonly used ADMs on biological behavior (attachment and proliferation) of human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs). Methods: This in vitro, experimental study was conducted on explanted and cultured HGFs. ADM types 1 and 2 (n=26; measuring 10x15 mm) were rinsed with saline, adapted to the bottom of 52 wells, exposed to HGFs with cell density of 16,000 cells/mL and incubated at 37°C for 12, 24 and 84 hours and seven days. Cell attachment was assessed 12 hours after incubation using 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) and methyl-thiazol- diphenyl-tetrazolium (MTT) assay under a fluorescence microscope. Cell viability was assessed at 24 and 84 hours and one week using the MTT assay. Cells were then platinum-coated and their morphology was evaluated under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Data were analyzed using ANOVA. Results: HGFs were evaluated in 60 samples in three groups (n=20). Cell attachment was the same in the three groups as shown by the MTT assay and DAPI test (P=0.6). Cell viability at one week was 3.73±0.02, 2.88±0.29 and 2.13±0.24 in the control, ADM 1 and ADM 2 groups, respectively. This difference was statistically significant (P=0.01). Conclusion: Both scaffolds were the same in terms of attachment of HGFs. However, ADM 1 was superior to ADM 2 in terms of cell viability and morphology at one week.it shows that the quality of acellular dermal scaffolds can have a significant influence on cellular behaviors and tissue maturation.
Keywords: Fibroblasts, Cell Survival, Tissue Scaffolds, Acellular Dermis
First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Security code

Abstract View: 27

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

PDF Download: 0

Your browser does not support the canvas element.