Effect of the polishing procedure and surface sealant application on fluoride release

Objective: This study aimed to assess the effect of the polishing procedure and surface sealant application on the fluoride release of restorative materials. Material and Methods: The groups were consisted of using five different restorative materials were employed: Beautifil II, GCP Glass Fill, Amalgomer CR, Zirconomer and Fuji IX GP. 30 disk-shaped specimens (8x2 mm) were prepared from each material. Each group was subdivided into three groups considering finishing procedures: Mylar strip, polishing with Super-Snap discs, G-Coat Plus application after polishing with Super-Snap discs. The amount of fluoride released into distilled water was measured using a fluoride ion-selective electrode and ion analyzer after 24 hours, followed by measurement on days 3, 7, 15, 21, and 28. Surface analysis of the materials was performed with SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) and EDS (Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy). The data were statistically analyzed using two-way repeated measure ANOVA and LSD test (p=0.05). Results: The highest amount of fluoride released was measured after the first 24 h for all materials. Beautifil II released less fluoride than other materials in all measurement periods (p<0.05). After polishing, the amount of fluoride released from all materials except Beautifil II increased (p<0.05). The application of G-Coat Plus did not impact the amount of fluoride release of any materials (p>0.05). EDS analysis showed the most percentage of oxygen in all materials. Conclusion: The polishing procedure might induce an increase in fluoride release of glass ionomer-based materials, and the application of G-Coat Plus cannot affect the amount of fluoride release. Keywords Energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy; Fluoride; Glass ionomer cement.

Download Full-text

Effect of Polishing Systems on Fluoride Release and Surface Roughness of Different Restorative Materials

Odovtos - International Journal of Dental Sciences ◽

10.15517/ijds.2020.39151 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 227-238

Author(s):

Soner Şişmanoğlu DDS, PhD ◽

Burak Gümüştaş DDS, PhD ◽

Zuhal Yıldırım-Bilmez DDS, PhD

Keyword(s):

Surface Roughness ◽

Repeated Measure ◽

Fluoride Release ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Polishing Process ◽

Selective Electrode ◽

Restorative Materials ◽

Clinical Benefits ◽

Fluoride Ion Selective Electrode ◽

One Way Anova

Secondary caries is an important factor in the replacement of the restorations, and it is thought that fluoride-releasing materials may prevent this problem. Furthermore, the fluoride release of the materials may be increased by polishing process. Available knowledge about the effect of polishing systems (PS) on the fluoride release of materials is limited. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate the effect of PS on the fluoride release of fluoride-containing materials. Restorative materials were divided into 6 groups: Fuji IX GP, Fuji II, Dyract XP, Beautifil II, Beautifil-Bulk, and Filtek Ultimate. Each group was also divided into four subgroups: Mylar strip, Sof-Lex Discs, Sof-Lex Diamond, and OneGloss. Fluoride release was determined using a fluoride ion-selective electrode. Surface roughness was evaluated with a profilometer. Two-way repeated measure and one-way ANOVA tests were used for statistical analysis. The initial rapid fluoride release was observed only in Fuji IX. The PS increased the fluoride release of Fuji IX and Fuji II and Dyract XP materials while reducing the fluoride release of resin-based materials. The highest surface roughness values were obtained with OneGloss. Further, a significant relationship between fluoride release and surface roughness was found. The polishing provides an increase in fluoride release, especially in glass-ionomer-based materials. This article revealed that there is a relationship between fluoride release and surface roughness. Proper PS must be chosen according to the material to provide the best clinical benefits in terms of fluoride release and surface roughness.

Download Full-text

Fluoride release from conventional, resin-modified and hybrid glass ionomer cements

Stomatoloski glasnik Srbije ◽

10.2478/sdj-2018-0018 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 65 (4) ◽

pp. 187-194

Author(s):

Maja Ležaja Zebić ◽

Nikola Jakovljević ◽

Vesna Miletić

Keyword(s):

Correlation Analysis ◽

Pearson Correlation ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Fluoride Concentration ◽

Base Material ◽

Time Interval ◽

Fluoride Release ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Restorative Materials ◽

Ionomer Cement

Summary Introduction The aim of the study was to quantify and compare fluoride release from four different glass ionomer cement products (GICs). Materials and Methods Standardized disk-shaped samples (5x2mm; n=5/group) of GIC restorative materials: conventional (Fuji IX, GC Corp., Japan), resin-modified (Fuji II LC, GC) and hybrid glass ionomer cement (Equia Forte, GC) and a conventional GIC liner/base material (Alfagal, Galenika, Serbia) were tested for fluoride release up to 21 days postsetting. Each sample was immersed in 5 mL of fresh deionized water during each time interval. Universal microhybrid composite (Filtek Z250, 3M EPSE, USA) and adhesive (Adper Single Bond, 3M ESPE) were used as negative controls. Fluoride release was measured using an F-selective electrode (Cole-Parmer, USA) and an ion meter (Oakton 700, Cole-Parmer, USA). Data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA, regression and correlation analysis at 0.05. Results The highest total fluoride release was measured from Alfagal (386±61 ppm/g), and significantly less from Equia (188±29 ppm/g), Fuji IX (143±11 ppm/g) and Fuji II LC (104±14 ppm/g) (p < 0.05). All GICs showed the highest fluoride release during the first 24 hours post-setting. After 3 days, fluoride release slowed down reaching a plateau for all materials. Regression and Pearson correlation analysis showed significant inverse relationship between fluoride release and sample mass and density (p<0.001). Conclusion Of the three GICs indicated for use as restorative materials, Equia Forte released the highest fluoride concentration. Fluoride release was material and density dependent, with higher release occurring from lower density GICs.

Download Full-text

Incorporation of Hydroxyapatite into Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC) Formulated Based on Alumino-Silicate-Fluoride Glass Ceramics from Waste Materials

Materials ◽

10.3390/ma14040954 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 14 (4) ◽

pp. 954

Author(s):

Wan Nurshamimi Wan Jusoh ◽

Khamirul Amin Matori ◽

Mohd Hafiz Mohd Zaid ◽

Norhazlin Zainuddin ◽

Mohammad Zulhasif Ahmad Khiri ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Chemical Elements ◽

Ageing Time ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Glass Ceramics ◽

Fluoride Glass ◽

Waste Materials ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

X Ray ◽

Alumino Silicate ◽

Ionomer Cement

Glass ionomer cement (GIC) is a well-known restorative material applied in dentistry. The present work aims to study the effect of hydroxyapatite (HA) addition into GIC based on physical, mechanical and structural properties. The utilization of waste materials namely clam shell (CS) and soda lime silica (SLS) glass as replacements for the respective CaO and SiO2 sources in the fabrication of alumino-silicate-fluoride (ASF) glass ceramics powder. GIC was formulated based on ASF glass ceramics, polyacrylic acid (PAA) and deionized water, while 1 wt.% of HA powder was added to enhance the properties of the cement samples. The cement samples were subjected to four different ageing times before being analyzed. In this study, the addition of HA caused an increment in density and compressive strength results along with ageing time. Besides, X-ray Diffraction (XRD) revealed the formation of fluorohydroxyapatite (FHA) phase in HA-added GIC samples and it was confirmed by Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) analysis which detected OH‒F vibration mode. In addition, needle-like and agglomeration of spherical shapes owned by apatite crystals were observed from Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FESEM). Based on Energy Dispersive X-ray (EDX) analysis, the detection of chemical elements in the cement samples were originated from chemical compounds used in the preparation of glass ceramics powder and also the polyacid utilized in initiating the reaction of GIC.

Download Full-text

Energy dispersive X-ray microanalysis, fluoride release, and antimicrobial properties of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment

Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry ◽

10.4103/2231-0762.186790 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 6 (4) ◽

pp. 366 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Sudhanshu Saxena ◽

Sonia Tiwari

Keyword(s):

Antimicrobial Properties ◽

Energy Dispersive ◽

Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽

Fluoride Release ◽

Glass Ionomer Cements ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

X Ray ◽

Restorative Treatment

Download Full-text

Fluoride Release from Restorative Materials

Brazilian Dental Journal ◽

10.1590/s0103-64402011000500001 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 22 (5) ◽

pp. 355-358 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Gabriela Romanini Basso ◽

Álvaro Della Bona ◽

Delton Luiz Gobbi ◽

Dileta Cecchetti

Keyword(s):

Standard Deviation ◽

Liquid Membrane ◽

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Negative Control ◽

The Other ◽

Fluoride Release ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Restorative Materials ◽

Ionomer Cement

The aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro fluoride (F) release from 4 restorative materials (3M ESPE): Ketak Molar Easymix [KME - conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC)]; Rely-X luting 2 [RL2 - resin-modified GIC (RMGIC)]; Vitremer (VIT- RMGIC); and Filtek Z250 [Z250 - negative control]. Disc-shaped specimens were fabricated according to the manufacturer’s instructions and placed into 10 mL of reverse osmosis water at 37°C until the analyses were done using a liquid membrane for selective F ion electrode (Orion 710). F release was evaluated every 6 h in the first day and thereafter daily during 28 days (d). The results were analyzed statistically by two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (α=0.05). Mean F release and standard deviation values (in ppm) were: KME: 6 h- 0.34 ± 0.04; 24 h- 1.22 ± 0.30; 7 d- 0.29 ± 0.09; 14 d- 0.20 ± 0.04; 28 d- 0.16 ± 0.01; RL2: 6 h- 2.46 ± 0.48; 24 h-12.33 ± 2.93; 7 d- 1.37 ± 0.38; 14 d- 0.80 ± 0.13; 28 d- 0.80 ± 0.21; VIT: 6 h- 0.98 ± 0.35; 24 h- 4.35 ± 1.22; 7 d- 0.66 ± 0.23; 14 d- 0.40 ± 0.07; 28 d- 0.39 ± 0.08; Z250: 6 h- 0.029 ± 0.001; 24 h- 0.024 ± 0.009; 7 d- 0.023 ± 0.004; 14 d- 0.025 ± 0.001; 28 d- 0.028 ± 0.001. RL2 RMGIC released more F than the other materials in all periods. The greatest release of F occurred in the first 24 h.

Download Full-text

A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF FLUORIDE RELEASE, RECHARGE AND RERELEASING ABILITIES OF THREE DIFFERENT RESTORATIVE MATERIALS - AN INVITRO STUDY

10.36106/gjra/4600973 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-4

Author(s):

C Sunil KUMAR ◽

Obula Reddy ◽

S. Satta Prasad ◽

N. Vamsee Krishna ◽

S. Sunil Kumar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Fluoride Concentration ◽

Deionized Water ◽

Control Group ◽

Fluoride Release ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Carious Lesions ◽

Restorative Materials ◽

Group B ◽

Ionomer Cement

INTRODUCTION: The most important property of Fluoride is anti-cariogenic property which aids in remineralization of incipient carious lesions in enamel thereby inhibiting enamel demineralization i.e. it helps in arresting or reversal of incipient enamel lesions. A prolonged exposure of incipient carious lesions to uoride in the aqueous phase achieves the cariostatic effect. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study is to evaluate the amount of uoride released by three different Restorative Materialsi.e. Glass Ionomer Cement, Resin Modied Glass Ionomer Cement, Cention on 1st,7th and 15th day followed by Recharge and Re-release after recharging with various Flouride applications. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY: Fifteen Disk-shaped specimens for each group (8.5 mm diameter; 3 mm thickness) were prepared from three different restorative materials using cylindrical Teon molds according to manufacturer's instructions. The specimens in each individual group were incubated in a 95% relative humid environment at 37°C for 24 hours. Specimens of each group were immersed in 20 ml deionized water in plastic bottles and stored in the incubator at 37°C, Fluoride concentration was measured using a UV Spectrophotometer after 1st ,7th & 15 days. The samples from each group were now divided into: 3 Sub Groups of ve each. Sub Group A - Control group – No topical uoride application. Sub Group B - The samples were recharged with 2% Neutral Sodium Fluoride solution for 4 minutes and washed with copious deionized water for 10 sec and dried on absorbent paper. Sub Group C - The samples were recharged by hand brushing with a Fluoridated brushing Dentifrice for four minutes and then wiped clean with a tissue and rinsed for 10 sec using copious deionized water and dried. Measurement of uoride Re-release is done by UV Spectrophotometer after 1st ,7th and 15thday after recharge.The results were statistically analysed using analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA) and Tukey Kramer multiple comparison tests (p≤0.05). RESULTS: Independent of the observation time period of thestudy the Conventional GIC released the highest amount of uoride followed by RMGIC & CENTION. The initial burst effect was seen with GIC'S but not with RMGIC, CENTION. After topical uoride application uoride re-release was highest in Sub Group B and GIC had a greater recharging ability followed by RMGIC & CENTION. The uoride re-release was greatest on 1st day followed by rapid return tonear exposure levels. CONCLUSION: From the study it was concluded that, the initialFluoride release was highest from Conventional GIC followedby Resin Modied GIC, CENTION. The Fluoride release was high when recharging with professional regime (2%NaF) as compared to home regime (Toothpaste).

Download Full-text

Fluoride-Releasing Restorative Materials: The Effect of a Resinous Coat on Ion Release

Acta Stomatologica Croatica ◽

10.15644/asc54/4/4 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 54 (4) ◽

pp. 371-381

Author(s):

Katarina Kelić ◽

Matej Par ◽

Kristina Peroš ◽

Ivana Šutej ◽

Zrinka Tarle

Keyword(s):

Glass Ionomer Cement ◽

Fluoride Release ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Adhesive Systems ◽

Ion Release ◽

Dental Adhesives ◽

Ph Changes ◽

Ph Values ◽

Restorative Materials ◽

Ionomer Cement

Objective: To determine the effect of two adhesive systems and a glass ionomer coating resin on fluoride release and concurrent pH changes over a period of 168 days. Material and methods: Four restorative materials were investigated: a giomer Beautiful II, an “alkasite” material Cention, a conventional composite Filtek Z250, and a glass ionomer cement Fuji IX Extra. Light-cured composite specimens were coated using G-aenial Bond and Clearfil Universal Bond Quick. Glass ionomer specimens were coated using GC Fuji Coat LC. Uncoated specimens were used as references. Quantitative fluoride release and pH changes were measured after 1 h, 24 h, 2 days, 7 days, 28 days, 84 days, and 168 days. Results: The cumulative fluoride release after 168 days increased for uncoated specimens in the following order: Filtek Z250 < Beautifil II < Cention < Fuji IX Extra. A comparatively lower fluoride release was measured for the composites coated with Clearfil Universal Bond Quick, with cumulative values after 168 days increasing in the following order: Filtek Z250 < Beautifil II < Cention. The composites coated with G-aenial Bond showed lower fluoride release compared to the uncoated specimens, with cumulative values increasing in the following order: Filtek Z250 < Beautifil II < Cention. The composites coated with G-aenial Bond showed pH values in the acidic range (4.4- 5.7) after 1 h and 24 h. Conclusion: Fluoride release varied among the investigated restorative materials and depended on the use of dental adhesives and coatings. The pH of all materials, coating types and time points varied.

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