Microleakage in class V cavities prepared using conventional method versus Er:YAG laser restored with glass ionomer cement or resin composite

AbstractTo investigate the impact of radiotherapy on surface properties of restorative dental materials. A conventional resin composite—CRC (Aura Enamel), a bulk-fill resin composite—BFRC (Aura Bulk-fill), a conventional glass ionomer cement—CGIC (Riva self cure), and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement—RMGIC (Riva light cure) were tested. Forty disc-shaped samples from each material (8 mm diameter × 2 mm thickness) (n = 10) were produced according to manufacturer directions and then stored in water distilled for 24 h. Surface wettability (water contact angle), Vickers microhardness, and micromorphology through scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before and after exposition to ionizing radiation (60 Gy) were obtained. The data were statistically evaluated using the two-way ANOVA and Tukey posthoc test (p < 0.05). Baseline and post-radiation values of contact angles were statistically similar for CRC, BFRC, and RMGIC, whilst post-radiation values of contact angles were statistically lower than baseline ones for CGIC. Exposition to ionizing radiation statistically increased the microhardness of CRC, and statistically decreased the microhardness of CGIC. The surface micromorphology of all materials was changed post-radiation. Exposure to ionizing radiation negatively affected the conventional glass ionomer tested, while did not alter or improved surface properties testing of the resin composites and the resin-modified glass ionomer cement tested.

Download Full-text

To Evaluate Shear Bond Strength of Resin Composite to Theracal Lc, Biodentine, and Resin–Modified Glass Ionomer Cement and Mode of Fracture: An In Vitro Study

Dental Journal of Advance Studies ◽

10.1055/s-0040-1712052 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (02) ◽

pp. 49-54

Author(s):

Salil Mehra ◽

Ashu K. Gupta ◽

Bhanu Pratap Singh ◽

Mandeep Kaur ◽

Ashwath Kumar

Keyword(s):

Statistical Analysis ◽

Bond Strength ◽

Shear Bond Strength ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Bonding Agent ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Universal Adhesive ◽

Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽

Ionomer Cement

Abstract Introduction The aim of the current study was to evaluate shear bond strength of resin composite bonded to Theracal LC, Biodentine, and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) using universal adhesive and mode of fracture. Materials and Methods A total of 50 caries-free maxillary and mandibular molars extracted were taken; occlusal cavities were prepared, mounted in acrylic blocks, and divided into five groups based on the liner used. Group 1: Biodentine liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied after 12 minutes. Group 2: Biodentine liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied after 14 days. Group 3: RMGIC liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied immediately. Group 4: RMGIC liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied after 7 days. Group 5: Theracal LC liner placed into the cavity and bonding agent and resin composite applied immediately. Each sample was bonded to resin composite using universal adhesive. Shear bond strength analysis was performed at a cross-head speed of 0.1 mm/min. Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was performed with one-way analysis of variance and posthoc Bonferroni test using SPSS version 22.0. Results and Conclusion Biodentine liner when bonded immediately to resin composite showed minimum shear bond strength. RMGIC when bonded to resin composite after 7 days showed maximum shear bond strength. Mode of fracture was predominantly cohesive in groups having Biodentine and Theracal LC as liner.

Download Full-text

Marginal Leakage of Endodontic Temporary Restorative Materials around Access Cavities Prepared with Pre-Endodontic Composite Build-Up: An In Vitro Study

Materials ◽

10.3390/ma13071700 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 13 (7) ◽

pp. 1700

Author(s):

Atsushi Kameyama ◽

Aoi Saito ◽

Akiko Haruyama ◽

Tomoaki Komada ◽

Setsuko Sugiyama ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Zinc Oxide ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

In Vitro Study ◽

Restorative Material ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Zinc Oxide Eugenol ◽

Restorative Materials ◽

Ionomer Cement

This study aimed to examine the marginal seal between various commercial temporary restorative materials and exposed dentin/built-up composite. Sixty bovine incisors were cut above the cemento-enamel junction, and half of the dentin was removed to form a step, which was built up using flowable resin composite. The root canals were irrigated, filled with calcium hydroxide, and sealed using one of six temporary sealing materials (hydraulic temporary restorative material, temporary stopping material, zinc oxide eugenol cement, glass-ionomer cement, auto-cured resin-based temporary restorative material, and light-cured resin-based temporary restorative material) (n = 10 for each material). The samples were thermocycled 500 times and immersed in an aqueous solution of methylene blue. After 2 days, they were cut along the long axis of the tooth and the depth of dye penetration was measured at the dentin side and the built-up composite side. For the margins of the pre-endodontic resin composite build-up, the two resin-based temporary restorative materials showed excellent sealing. Hydraulic temporary restorative material had a moderate sealing effect, but the sealing effect of both zinc oxide eugenol cement and glass-ionomer cement was poorer.

Download Full-text

Comparative Evaluation of Microhardness and Compressive Strength of Cention N, Bulk Fill Resin Composite and Glass Ionomer Cement

Egyptian Dental Journal ◽

10.21608/edj.2021.50807.1356 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 67 (2) ◽

pp. 1657-1662

Author(s):

Rehab Safy ◽

Emad Aboalazm

Keyword(s):

Compressive Strength ◽

Comparative Evaluation ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Ionomer Cement

Download Full-text

Microleakage of glass ionomer cement restorations

Stomatoloski glasnik Srbije ◽

10.2298/sgs0902078d ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 56 (2) ◽

pp. 78-85 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lado Davidovic ◽

Slavoljub Tomic ◽

Mihael Stanojevic ◽

Slavoljub Zivkovic

Keyword(s):

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Sem Analysis ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Penetration Test ◽

Dental Tissue ◽

Class V ◽

Oral Side ◽

Dye Penetration ◽

Hard Dental Tissue ◽

Ionomer Cement

Introduction. A lack of appropriate adhesiveness is one of the biggest problems in the restorative dentistry today and the main cause of the microleakage between restorations and hard dental tissue. The aim of this study was to assess the adhesiveness of two different glass ionomer cement restorations class V on the hard dental tissue using the SEM analysis and dye penetration test. Material and methods. The study included 80 extracted teeth for orthodontic reasons (premolars and molars) in both genders and different age. On the vestibular and oral side of the teeth, adhesive preparations class V were done (size 3?2?2 mm). On the vestibular preparation, GC Fuji II was applicated and GC Fuji II LC-improved on the oral side. The quality of the adhesiveness between restorations and hard dental tissue was evaluated using the SEM analysis and dye penetration test (0.5% basic fuxsin). Linear penetration of the dye was observed using 10 times magnification. Results. The results showed that microleakage was presented with both materials but a ratio was less with Fuji II LC compared with Fuji II. Also, the microleakage was less on the occlusal parts of the restorations than on the gingival, with both materials. Microleakage was noticed in 93.44% teeth with Fuji II GJC restorations with index of microleakage of 148 on all edges. Fuji II LC GJC restorations showed microleakage in 68.4% teeth with index of microleakage 75 on all edges. The SEM analysis showed that both glass ionomer materials had better adhesiveness to the enamel than to the dentin. The average gap length between Fuji II LC and dentin was 9 ?m and Fuji II 17 ?m, respectively. Conclusion. Better adhesiveness to the hard dental tissue was achieved with materials of the newer generations, resin modificated glas ionomer cements.

Download Full-text

Biocompatibility of a Conventional Glass Ionomer, Ceramic Reinforced Glass Ionomer, Giomer and Resin Composite to Fibroblasts: In vitro Study

Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry ◽

10.17796/jcpd.37.4.98h23631v8734478 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 37 (4) ◽

pp. 403-406 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

S Tamilselvam ◽

MJ Divyanand ◽

P Neelakantan

Keyword(s):

Cell Viability ◽

Mtt Assay ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

In Vitro Study ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Time Periods ◽

The Impact ◽

Ionomer Cement

Objective: This aim of this study was at compare the fibroblast cytotoxicicty of four restorative materials - a conventional glass ionomer cement (GC Fuji Type II GIC), a ceramic reinforced glass ionomer cement (Amalgomer), a giomer (Beautifil II) and a resin composite (Filtek Z350) at three different time periods (24, 48 and 72 hours). Method: The succinyl dehydrogenase (MTT) assay was employed. Cylindrical specimens of each material (n=15) were prepared and stored in Dulbecco's modified Eagle medium, following which L929 fibroblasts were cultured in 96 well plates. After 24 hours of incubation, the MTT assay was performed to detect the cell viability. The method was repeated after 48 and 72 hours. The impact of materials and exposure times on cytotoxicity of fibroblasts was statistically analyzed using two way ANOVA (P=0.05). Results: Both time and material had an impact on cell viability, with giomer demonstrating the maximum cell viability at all time periods. The cell viability in the giomer group was significantly different from all other materials at 24 and 72 hours (P<0.05), while at 48 hours giomer was significantly different only with resin composite (P<0.05). Conclusions: Giomers showed better biocompatibility than conventional and ceramic reinforced glass ionomer cements and, resin composite. Ceramic reinforced glass ionomer demonstrated superior biocompatibility compared to conventional glass ionomer.

Download Full-text

Influence of thermocycling on shear bond strength of glass ionomer cement to Er:YAG laser-prepared enamel

Lasers in Surgery and Medicine ◽

10.1002/lsm.22452 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 48 (10) ◽

pp. 978-984 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Yuan-Yuan Kong ◽

Yi Chen ◽

Rui Shen ◽

Qian-Zhou Jiang ◽

Min-Le Chen

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Shear Bond Strength ◽

Er:Yag Laser ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Ionomer Cement

Download Full-text

Microleakage after Thermocycling of Three Self-Etch Adhesives under Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement Restorations

International Journal of Dentistry ◽

10.1155/2010/728453 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 2010 ◽

pp. 1-6 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Sabine O. Geerts ◽

Laurence Seidel ◽

Adelin I. Albert ◽

Audrey M. Gueders

Keyword(s):

Polyacrylic Acid ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Adhesive System ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Class V ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽

One Step ◽

Self Etch ◽

Ionomer Cement

This study was designed to evaluate microleakage that appeared on Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) restorations. Sixty class V cavities () were cut on thirty extracted third molars, which were randomly allocated to three experimental groups. All the buccal cavities were pretreated with polyacrylic acid, whereas the lingual cavities were treated with three one-step Self-Etch adhesives, respectively, Xeno III (Dentsply Detrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany), iBond exp (Heraeus Kulzer gmbH & Co. KG, Hanau, Germany), and Adper Prompt-L-Pop (3M ESPE AG, Dental products Seefeld, Germany). All cavities were completely filled with RMGIC, teeth were thermocycled for 800 cycles, and leakage was evaluated. Results were expressed as means standard deviations (SDs). Microleakage scores were analysed by means of generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) assuming an ordinal logistic link function. All results were considered to be significant at the 5% critical level (). The results showed that bonding RMGIC to dentin with a Self-Etch adhesive rather than using polyacrylic acid did not influence microleakage scores (), except for one tested Self-Etch adhesive, namely, Xeno III (). Nevertheless, our results did not show any significant difference between the three tested Self-Etch adhesive systems. In conclusion, the pretreatment of dentin with Self-Etch adhesive system, before RMGIC filling, seems to be an alternative to the conventional Dentin Conditioner for the clinicians as suggested by our results (thermocycling) and others (microtensile tests).

Download Full-text

Protective Effect of Resin Coating on the Microleakage of Class V Restorations Following Treatment with Carbamide Peroxide In Vitro

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/10-039-lr ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 35 (6) ◽

pp. 634-640 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

H. Yu ◽

Q. Li ◽

T. Attin ◽

Y. Wang

Keyword(s):

Protective Effect ◽

Clinical Relevance ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Carbamide Peroxide ◽

Class V ◽

Resin Coating ◽

Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽

Ionomer Cement

Clinical Relevance Carbamide peroxide treatment increased the microleakage of Class V conventional glass-ionomer cement and resin modified glass-ionomer cement restorations. The resin coating is an effective method to avoid bleaching-induced microleakage without affecting the bleaching outcome.

Download Full-text

Shear Bond Strength Evaluation of Resin Composite Bonded to GIC Using Three Different Adhesives

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/08-009-l ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 34 (4) ◽

pp. 467-471 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

V. Gopikrishna ◽

M. Abarajithan ◽

J. Krithikadatta ◽

D. Kandaswamy

Keyword(s):

Bond Strength ◽

Clinical Relevance ◽

Shear Bond Strength ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Strength Evaluation ◽

Ionomer Cement

Clinical Relevance The bond strength of resin composite to glass-ionomer cement can be enhanced when a self-etching primer is employed over unset GIC or when a glass-ionomer based adhesive is employed over set GIC when compared to using a total-etch adhesive.

Download Full-text