scholarly journals Sealing Ability of Three Different Surface Coating Materials on Conventional and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Restoration in Primary Anterior Teeth: An In vitro Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anshula Deshpande ◽  
Chirag Macwan ◽  
Steffi Dhillon ◽  
Medha Wadhwa ◽  
Neelam Joshi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Coating ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Coating Materials ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Ionomer Cement ◽  
Group 1

Introduction: Microleakage is an important property that has been used in assessing the success of any restorative material used in restoring a tooth. Immediate application of a surface coating agent is suggested to protect glass ionomer cement against moisture contamination and dehydration during early setting. Aim: To compare marginal microleakage of two different Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC)- Conventional GIC and Resin Modified GIC in primary anterior teeth using three surface coating materials. Materials and Methods: An in vitro study was conducted between January 2014 to October 2017 on freshly extracted 40 anterior primary teeth which were randomly assigned into two main groups (Fuji II GIC and Fuji II LC GIC) with four subgroups (control-no surface coating, A=GC Fují Varnish II, B=GC G-Coat Plus, C=Icon). A standardised Class V cavity preparation was prepared on the labial surface of each tooth. Specimens were coated with two layers of nail varnish, leaving a 1 mm window around the cavity margins and placed in a solution of Methylene blue Dye for 24 hour at 37°C. The teeth were sectioned longitudinally in a buccolingual direction of the restorations and evaluated under stereomicroscope to check extent of dye penetration. The results were analysed by ANOVA and Tukey’s post-hoc test (p≤0.05). Results: It was found that maximum microleakage was seen in group 1 (Fuji II GIC) as compared to group 2 (Fuji II LC GIC) and it was non-significant (p=0.53). Ascending order for mean microleakage for Group 1 was as follows: Control >GC Fuji Varnish >Icon DMG >GC G-Coat and for Group 2: Control >GC Fuji Varnish >Icon DMG >GC G-Coat. Icon when compared with Gc coat and Varnish also showed non-significant (p=0.137) difference in Group 2. Conclusion: All three different surface coatings can seal glass ionomer restorations. The GC G-Coat Plus has the least microleakage on Resin-Modified GIC (RMGIC) compared to the other surface coatings. This would aid the clinicians to make appropriate decision regarding the choice of material to be used for restoration and coating in anterior primary teeth.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Marginal Percolation of the Glass Ionomer Fillings at Temporary Teeth

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 230-232
Author(s):  
Mihaela Valentina Cirdei ◽  
Daliana Mocuta ◽  
Emilia Ogodescu ◽  
Ana Petcu ◽  
Andreea Lazea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Diamond Bur ◽  
Irradiation Treatment ◽  
Blue Solution ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Deciduous Molars ◽  
Ionomer Cement

The purpose of this in vitro study is to evaluate the marginal percolation-micro leakage by comparing the possible infiltration of ionomer cement filling which was used to restore a class I cavity prepared by classic conventional method - diamond bur versus Er:YAG laser irradiation treatment. Ten molars were included in this study. The molars were random divided in two groups: group 1 - laser treatment and group 2- classic conventional treatments. The teeth were immersed in methylene blue solution for 24 h. Afterwards, the molars were vestibulo-oral sectioned through the centre of each restoration in order to see any signs of marginal percolation. The marginal percolation observed was more significant in conventional preparations group than in laser�s group. The glass ionomer cement remains one of the most adequate restorative materials to be used on deciduous molars when micro infiltration is questionable.

Evaluation of Microleakage of Orthodontic Bands Cemented With CPP-ACP-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-131
Author(s):  
Farzin Heravi ◽  
Hossein Bagheri ◽  
Abdolrasoul Rangrazi
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Fluid Filtration ◽  
Filtration Method ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Cooperation ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Ionomer Cement

Aims and Objectives: In recent years, researchers have focused on finding methods of eliminating caries and white spot lesions under orthodontic bands without requiring patient cooperation. One of the effective and preventive strategies is the addition of antibacterial and remineralizing agents to the band cement. However, modifying the cement should not lead to microleakage and weakening of its mechanical properties. This in vitro study represents a continuation of our previous work of investigating the retentive strength of orthodontic bands cemented with casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP)-modified glass ionomer cement (GIC). Material and Methods: 60 extracted human premolars were randomly divided into two groups (n = 30). In group 1, stainless steel bands were cemented with GIC. In group 2, a novel dental caries-preventive material, CPP-ACP, was incorporated into the GIC for cementing. The microleakage of each group was measured by the fluid filtration method. Results: Results showed no statistically significant difference in microleakage of either group (GIC and CPP-ACP-modified GIC). Conclusion: We concluded that 1.56% w/w CPP-ACP can be incorporated with GIC for cementing orthodontic bands without promoting microleakage.

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.

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF RESTORATIVE TREATMENTS ON NON-CARIOUS CERVICAL LESIONS OF COMPOSITE AND GLASS IONOMER CEMENT

2020 ◽  
pp. 38-45
Author(s):  
Duong Nguyen Thi Thuy ◽  
Huong Nguyen Thi Kim
Keyword(s):  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Composite Glass ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Ionomer Cement ◽  
Group 1

Background: Composite and Glass ionomer cement (GIC) are common restorative materials of non carious cervical lesions (NCCLs), which effects are controverisial. The aim of the present study was to compare the result of restorations on NCCLs between Composite and GIC. Materials and Methods: follow-up clinical trial with split-mouth design. Thirty-six patients with 96 NCCLs were divided into 2 groups (n=48/group): Group 1 restored by Composite, Group 2 restored by GIC. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 1 and 3 months for pulpal sensitivity, restoration morphology and overall success grade. Results: GIC restorations gained 100% Good results for all parameters at 3 time points. Composite showed 87.5%, 93.8% and 97.9% Good results at baseline, 1 and 3 months, sequentially. At 3 weeks recall, 1 Composite restorations (2.1%) showed Moderate results of Retention and 2 Composite restorations (4.2%) changed colour. Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference seen among the three groups for 3 parameters. Key words: non-carious cervical lesion, Composite, Glass ionomer cement

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

Materials ◽  
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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document