scholarly journals Fluoride-Releasing Dental Restorative Materials: An Update

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Nicholson
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Acid Attack ◽  
Dental Cement ◽  
Dental Restoratives ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Dental Restorative ◽  
Natural Tooth ◽  
Ionomer Cement

SUMMARYThe fluoride ion has a well-established beneficial role in dentistry in protecting the teeth from assault by caries. It is known to contribute to the dynamic mineralisation process of the natural tooth mineral, and also to become incorporated with the mineral phase, forming a thin layer of fluorapatite. This is more resistant to acid attack than the native hydroxyapatite, hence protects the tooth against further decay. Other recently discovered aspects of the role and uptake of fluoride will also be discussed.One of the widely used dental restoratives, the glass-ionomer dental cement, is able to release fluoride in a sustained manner that may continue for many years, and this is seen as clinically beneficial. The closely related resin-modified glass-ionomer cement, and also the polyacid-modified composite resin (“compomer”) are able to do the same. There are also fluoride-containing conventional composite resins able to release fluoride.These various materials are reviewed and the way in which they release fluoride are described, as well as the effectiveness of the release at the levels involved. Studies of effectiveness of fluoride release from these various classes of material are reviewed, and shown to suggest that release from conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomers is more beneficial than from composite resins. This is attributed to 2 causes: firstly, that it is not possible to replace the lost fluoride in composites, unlike glass-ionomers, and secondly because the other ions released from glass-ionomers (calcium, phosphate) are able to contribute to local remineralisation of the tooth. The absence of these other ions in fluoridated composites means that remineralisation is able to occur to a lesser extent, if at all.

Surface Hardness Properties of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cements and Polyacid-Modified Composite Resins

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 42-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusuf Ziya Bayindir ◽  
Mehmet Yildiz
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Water Storage ◽  
Surface Hardness ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Bottom Surface ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Hardness Values ◽  
Ionomer Cement

Abstract In this study the top and bottom surface hardness of two polyacid-modified composite resins (PMCRs), one resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), and one composite resin were evaluated. The affect of water storage on their hardness was also investigated. The study was conducted using four different groups, each having five specimens obtained from fiberglass die molds with a diameter of 5 mm and a height of 2 mm. Measurements were made on the top and bottom surface of each specimen and recorded after 24 hours and again at 60 days. All tested materials showed different hardness values, and the values of top surfaces of the specimens were found to be higher than the bottom surface in all test groups. There was no statistical difference in the Vickers hardness (HV) values when the test specimens were kept in water storage. In conclusion Hytac displayed microhardness values higher than Vitremer and Dyract. We found the order of HV values to be Surfil > Hytac > Dyract > Vitremer, respectively. Vitremer presented the lowest microhardness level and Surfil the highest. Citation Bayindir YZ, Yildiz M. Surface Hardness Properties of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cements and Polyacid-Modified Composite Resins. J Contemp Dent Pract 2004 November;(5)4:042-049.

scholarly journals Effect of Hydroxyapatite on Surface Roughness of Zirconomer, and Conventional and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomers

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farahnaz Sharafeddin ◽  
Somaye Bahrani
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Distilled Water ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Dental Restorative ◽  
One Way Anova ◽  
Ionomer Cement

Objectives: Glass ionomer cements (GICs) are among the most popular dental restorative materials, but their use is limited due to their clinical disadvantages. Many efforts have been made to improve the properties of these materials by adding various fillers. Incorporation of hydroxyapatite (HA) into the GICs is considered to improve the physical properties of restorations, and may prevent treatment failure. This study aimed to evaluate the surface roughness (Ra) of a conventional glass ionomer cement (CGIC), a resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) and a Zirconomer with and without micro-hydroxyapatite (µHA). Materials and Methods: This experimental study was conducted on 6 groups (n=10) including CGIC, CGIC + µHA, RMGI, RMGI + µHA, Zirconomer, and Zirconomer + µHA. A total of 60 disc-shaped samples (6 mm × 2 mm) were prepared in plastic molds and were stored in distilled water for 24 h. After polishing of the specimens, their Ra was measured by a profilometer in micrometers (µm). The data were analyzed using two and one-way ANOVA, Tukey's HSD test, and independent t-test. Results: Incorporation of µHA resulted in statistically significant differences in Ra between the study groups (P<0.05). Following the incorporation of µHA, the Ra significantly decreased in CGIC (P=0.013) and Zirconomer (P=0.003). However, addition of µHA to RMGI resulted in a significant increase in its Ra (P<0.001). Conclusion: Addition of µHA decreased the Ra of Zirconomer and CGIC, and increased the surface roughness of RMGI samples.

Fluoride Release from a Resin-modified Glass-ionomer Cement in a Continuous-flow System: Effect of pH

2003 ◽  
Vol 82 (10) ◽  
pp. 829-832 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.M. Carey ◽  
M. Spencer ◽  
R.J. Gove ◽  
F.C. Eichmiller
Keyword(s):  
Continuous Flow ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Measuring System ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
System Effect ◽  
Dental Tissues ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Dental Restorative ◽  
Ionomer Cement

Fluoride is added to many dental restorative materials, including glass-ionomer cements, for the specific purpose of leaching fluoride into the surrounding tissues to provide secondary caries inhibition. During the caries process, an acidic environment attacks the dental tissues as well as the glass-ionomer cement. We hypothesized that pH significantly affects the rate of release of fluoride from the glass-ionomer cement. A continuous-flow fluoride-measuring system that monitors the amount of fluoride released over time was used to determine the release of fluoride from a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (KetacFil®). The results show that the release rate began with a fast burst of fluoride which quickly diminished to low levels in 3 days. Under neutral pH conditions, the rate of fluoride release at 72 hrs was significantly slower than at pH 4.

scholarly journals Cuspal Deflection in Premolar Teeth Restored Using Current Composite Resins With and Without Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Liner

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 282-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Karaman ◽  
G Ozgunaltay
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Ionomer Cement

SUMMARY Aim: To evaluate the effects of four different types of composite resins and a resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) liner on the cuspal deflection of large MOD cavities in vitro. Materials & Methods: One hundred twenty-eight extracted human upper premolar teeth were used. After the teeth were divided into eight groups (n=16), standardized large MOD cavities were prepared. The distance between cusp tips was measured before and after the cavity preparations with a digital micrometer. Then the teeth were restored with different resin composites (Filtek Supreme XT, Filtek P60, Filtek Z250, Filtek Silorane - 3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) with and without a RMGIC liner (Vitrebond, 3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA). Cuspal deflection was measured 5 min, 24 h, and 48 h after the completion of restorations. The data were statistically analyzed with Friedman and Kruskal Wallis tests. Results: A significant reduction in cuspal deflection was observed in Filtek Silorane restorations with and without RMGIC liner (p&lt;0.05). In all restored teeth, the distance between cusps was reduced but they did not return to their original positions during the 48 h period. All teeth showed cuspal deflection, but placement of RMGIC liner reduced it. Conclusion: The use of silorane-based composites and the placement of RMGIC liner under the composite resin restorations resulted in significantly reduced cuspal deflection.

Microleakage of class II restoration with zirconia inlay: An in vitro study

2019 ◽  
pp. 61-67
Author(s):  
Xuan Anh Ngoc Ho ◽  
Anh Chi Phan ◽  
Toai Nguyen
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Self Etch ◽  
Ionomer Cement ◽  
Group 1 ◽  
Composite Restoration

Background: Class II restoration with zirconia inlay is concerned by numerous studies about the luting coupling between zirconia inlay and teeth. The present study was performed to evaluate the microleakage of Class II zirconia inlayusing two different luting agents and compare to direct restoration using bulk fill composite. Aims: To evaluate the microleakage of Class II restorations using three different techniques. Materials and methods: The study was performed in laboratory with three groups. Each of thirty extracted human teeth was prepared a class II cavity with the same dimensions, then these teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups restored by 3 different approaches. Group 1: zirconia inlay cemented with self-etch resin cement (Multilink N); Group 2: zirconia inlay cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji Plus); Group 3: direct composite restoration using bulk fill composite(Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill). All restorations were subjected to thermal cycling (100 cycles 50C – 55 0C), then immersed to 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. The microleakage determined by the extent of dye penetration along the gingival wall was assessed using two methods: quantitative and semi-quantitative method. Results: Among three types of restorations, group 1 demonstrated the significantly lower rate of leakage compared to the others, while group 2 and 3 showed no significant difference. Conclusion: Zirconia inlay restoration cemented with self-etch resin cement has least microleakage degree when compare to class II zirconia inlay restoration cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer cement and direct composite restoration using bulk fill composite. Key words: inlay, zirconia ceramic, class II restoration, microleakage.

scholarly journals 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

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document