scholarly journals Effect of heat on the hardness of glass carbomer cement used in atraumatic restorative treatment

RSBO ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-11
Author(s):  
Natascha Douat Hannegraf ◽  
Maria Eduarda Schultze Mendes Ribeiro ◽  
Célia Maria Condeixa de França Lopes ◽  
Flares Baratto-Filho
Keyword(s):  
Heat Treatment ◽  
Room Temperature ◽  
Vickers Microhardness ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Distilled Water ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Light Curing ◽  
Penetration Time

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of heat treatment on the microhardness of two glass ionomer cements: EQUIA Forte (GC Corporation) and GCP Glass Fill (GCPDental). Material and methods: Twenty specimens of the two glass ionomer cements were prepared following the manufacturer’s instructions, and 10 specimens of each material received heat treatment with a light curing unit (Carbo LED lamp, GCP-Dental). After seven days of storage in distilled water at room temperature (23°C), the 40 specimens were submitted for Vickers microhardness test (microhardness HMV 2T). Five indentations were performed on each specimen with a load of 100g, with a 10 second penetration time. Results: For both materials, the average microhardness value were higher in the groups that did not undergo heat treatment, the group presenting with the highest microhardness value was EQUIA Forte (GC Corporation) without heat treatment (125.3), and the lowest value was found for GCP Glass Fill (GCP-Dental) with heat treatment (72.9). Conclusion: The heat treatment had no influence on the microhardness of the glass ionomer cements tested.

Effect of Mixing Process on Microleakage of Glass Ionomer Cements Used in Atraumatic Restorative Treatment on Primary Molars

2007 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 251-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernanda de Morais Ferreira ◽  
Miriam Pimenta Parreira do Vale ◽  
Wellington Corrêa Jansen ◽  
Saul Martins Paiva ◽  
Isabela Almeida Pordeus
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Primary Molars ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Mixing Process ◽  
Mechanical Mixing ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Dye Penetration

Aiming to assess the effect of mixing process on microleakage, 40 primary molars were filled with encapsulated glass ionomer cements (GICs) (Vidrion,RCaps and Fuji,IXGPFAST) or with GICs stored in bottles (Vidrion,R and Fuji,IX). Dye penetration was assessed using scores. Encapsulation and mechanical mixing have reduced significantly marginal microleakage levels in class II restorations performed with conventional GICs if compared to the values obtained by their bottled correspondents (p=0,000).

Antibacterial activity of four glass ionomer cements used in atraumatic restorative treatment

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 1859-1862 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata Cristiane da Silva ◽  
Angela Cristina Cilense Zuanon ◽  
Denise Madalena Palomari Spolidorio ◽  
Juliana Alvares Duarte Bonini Campos
Keyword(s):  
Antibacterial Activity ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Restorative Treatment

scholarly journals Mechanical performance of encapsulated restorative glass-ionomer cements for use with Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART)

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustavo Fabian MOLINA ◽  
Ricardo Juan CABRAL ◽  
Ignacio MAZZOLA ◽  
Laura BRAIN LASCANO ◽  
Jo. E. FRENCKEN
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Performance ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Restorative Treatment

scholarly journals Tratamiento restaurador atraumático: Eficacia clínica de ionómeros de vidrio en cavidades clase I

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-71
Author(s):  
Katia Medina
Keyword(s):  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Para Determinar ◽  
Treatment Trends

La Técnica de Restauración Atraumática (TRA) es un procedimiento preventivo–restauradormínimamente invasivo, como alternativa de tratamiento para poblaciones vulnerables conpoco o nulo acceso a servicios de salud, que consiste en la remoción del tejido dentario cariado utilizando sólo instrumentos manuales y un material adhesivo de restauración: el ionómerode vidrio de alta viscosidad debido a sus propiedades físicas y químicas, como la adhesión ala estructura dental, la biocompatibilidad, la reacción de fraguado químico y el desarrollo yla liberación de fluoruro, que le confieren características preventivas. Objetivo: Revisar laevidencia sobre la eficacia clínica, mediante el desempeño clínico y la supervivencia de losionómeros en el tratamiento restaurador atraumático en dentición decidua. Métodos: Se realizó la búsqueda de información: estudios in vitro, ensayos clínicos aleatorizados y revisionessistemáticas con antigüedad máxima de 10 años, en las bases de datos Medline, Scielo y Scopus, con las estrategias de búsqueda (“Dental Atraumatic Restorative Treatment/therapeuticuse”[Mesh] OR “Dental Atraumatic Restorative Treatment/trends”[MesH] OR ART OR PRAT) y((“Dental Atraumatic Restorative Treatment”[Mesh]) AND (“Glass Ionomer Cements”[Mesh])OR “Ketac-Molar Quick” [Supplementary Concept]). Conclusiones: Existe evidencia científicasuficiente para determinar el éxito de las restauraciones TRA en lesiones de una superficieen dentición decidua, incluso en comparación con los materiales restauradores de los tratamientos convencionales. El desempeño clínico y la supervivencia es alta cuando se utilizan ionómeros de alta viscosidad. Aún no hay consenso acerca de las ventajas del uso de ionómerosde menor costo, encapsulados, reforzados con metal y/o con propiedades mejoradas.

scholarly journals Surface roughness of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment (ART)

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata Cristiane da Silva ◽  
Angela Cristina Cilense Zuanon
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Atraumatic Restorative Treatment ◽  
Scanning Electron Microscopy Data ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Restorative Treatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Microscopy Data

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness of four conventional chemically cured glass ionomer cements (Fuji IX, Ketac Molar, Vidrion R and Vitromolar) commonly used in atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) immediately after material preparation. Twenty specimens of each glass ionomer cement were fabricated and surface roughness was measured after material setting. The specimens were further examined under scanning electron microscopy. Data were analyzed statistically by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney test at 5% significance level. Two-by-two comparisons showed statistically significant difference (p<0.05) between all materials, except for Ketac Molar and Vidrion R, which had statically similar results (p>0.05). Regarding their results of surface roughness, the materials can be presented in a crescent order, as follows: Ketac Molar < Vidrion R < Fuji IX < Vitromolar. In conclusion, from the tested glass ionomer cements, Fuji IX, Ketac Molar and Vidrion R presented acceptable surface roughness after setting reaction while Vitromolar showed remarkably higher surface roughness.

scholarly journals Evaluation of surface roughness and hardness of different glass ionomer cements

2012 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 079-086 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oya Bala ◽  
Deniz Hacer Arisu ◽  
Ihsan Yikilgan ◽  
Seda Arslan ◽  
Abdulkadir Gullu
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Vickers Microhardness ◽  
Hardness Test ◽  
Lower Surface ◽  
The Other ◽  
Distilled Water ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Measuring Instrument ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Hardness Values

ABSTRACTObjectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate surface roughness and hardness of a nanofiller GIC, a resin-modified GIC, three conventional GICs, and a silver-reinforced GICMethods: For each material, 11 specimens were prepared and then stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h. The surface roughness of 5 specimens was measured using a surface profilometer before polishing and after polishing with coarse, medium, fine, superfine aluminum oxide abrasive Sof-Lex discs respectively. The hardness of the upper surfaces of the remaining 6 specimens was measured with a Vickers microhardness measuring instrument.Results: All tested GICs showed lower surface roughness values after the polishing procedure. Surface finish of nanofiller GIC was smoother than the other tested GICs after polishing. This was followed by resin-modified GIC, Fuji II LC; then silver-reinforced GIC, Argion Molar, conventional GICs, Aqua Ionofil Plus, Fuji IX, and Ionofil Molar, respectively. The result of the hardness test indicated that the microhardness value of silver-reinforced GIC was greater than that of the other GICs. When the hardness values of all tested GICs were compared, the differences between materials (except Aqua Ionofil Plus with Ionofil Molar and Ketac N100 with Fuji II LC (P>.05)) were found statistically significant (P<.05).Conclusions: According to the results of this study, it can be concluded that the differences in the composition of GICs may affect their surface roughness and hardness. (Eur J Dent 2012;6:79-86)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document