scholarly journals Mechanical Properties of High-Viscosity Glass Ionomer Cement and Nanoparticle Glass Carbomer

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Cristina Olegário ◽  
Anna Paula Vieira Ferreira Prado Malagrana ◽  
Sabrina Sun Ha Kim ◽  
Daniela Hesse ◽  
Tamara Kerber Tedesco ◽  
...  

Introduction. The lack of evidence regarding the best available material for restoring occlusal-proximal cavities in primary teeth leads to the development of new restorative material, with nanoparticles, in order to enhance mechanical properties, resulting in increased restoration longevity.Aim.To evaluate the Knoop hardness and bond strength of nanoparticles material glass carbomer cement (CAR) and high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (GIC) in sound and caries-affected dentin.Methods.Forty bovine incisors were selected and assigned into four groups (n=10): SGIC, sound dentin and GIC; SCAR, sound dentin and CAR; CGIC, caries-affected dentin and GIC; and CCAR, caries-affected dentin and CAR. All groups were submitted to microshear bond strength (MPa). Knoop hardness was also performed. Bond strength values were subjected to two-way ANOVA and Tukey test. Knoop hardness data were subjected to one-way ANOVA.Results.GIC presented higher Knoop hardness (P<0.001) and bond strength (P=0.027) than CAR. Also, both materials showed better performance in sound than in caries-affected substrates (P=0.001). The interaction between factors was not statistically different (P=0.494).Conclusion.Despite nanoparticles, CAR shows inferior performance as compared to GIC for the two properties testedin vitro. Moreover, sound dentin results in better bonding performance of both restorative materials evaluated.

1989 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 207-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. A. Cook ◽  
C. C. Youngson

The shear/peel bond strength of a new material, a ‘hybrid’ of a composite resin and a glass ionomer cement, was compared in vitro with the bond strengths of a composite resin and of a glass ionomer cement. The new material had a significantly greater bond strength than the other materials tested and its properties were very similar to the composite resin. Unlike the glass ionomer cement, etching of the enamel before applying the adhesive is required. The clinical indications for using this new cement are discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (33) ◽  
pp. 2769-2772
Author(s):  
Arjun Sajjeev ◽  
Ashwini Tumkur Shivkumar ◽  
Sowmya Halasabalu Kalgeri

BACKGROUND Marginal integrity of glass ionomer as a restorative material is an important factor for the longevity of the restoration. Class V and cervical abrasions are the most critical and challenging lesions for restorations. The choice of material for restoring class V and cervical abrasions is glass ionomer cement (GIC). Sensitivity to moisture contact during the early setting stages is the drawback of GIC. To overcome the drawback, modifications of glass ionomer cement were made by the addition of chitosan. Chitosan (CH) is a natural linear polysaccharide obtained partially and fully by deacetylated chitin compounds, which are found in crab and shrimp shells, with properties like nontoxicity, biodegradability, bioadhesive, biocompatibility, and biorenewabilty which has led to its use in various fields. Thus, this study intended to evaluate the microleakage of conventional glass ionomer cement and chitosan modified glass ionomer cement using a spectrophotometer. METHODS 60 teeth extracted for orthodontic propose were selected for the study and randomly divided into two groups, class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surface and samples were restored with conventional glass ionomer cement and chitosan modified glass ionomer cement respectively, teeth were immersed in 0.5 % methylene blue for 24 hours and assessed using a spectrophotometer. RESULTS The data were analysed using the Unpaired T - test, and with statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) for Windows, version 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y., USA). The confidence interval was set at 95 % and values of P < 0.05 were interpreted as statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS The study concluded that the addition of chitosan improves the mechanical properties of conventional glass ionomer cement, and a spectrophotometer can be used as a better evaluation tool in assessing microleakage. KEY WORDS Chitosan Modified GIC, Glass Ionomer Cement, Microleakage, Spectrophotometer


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
T Praveen Kumar Reddy ◽  
Kolasani Srinivasa Rao ◽  
Garlapati Yugandhar ◽  
B Sunil Kumar ◽  
SN Chandrasekhar Reddy ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT The acid pretreatment and use of composite resins as the bonding medium has disadvantages like scratching and loss of surface enamel, decalcification, etc. To overcome disadvantages of composite resins, glass ionomers and its modifications are being used for bonding. The study was conducted to evaluate the efficiency of resin reinforced glass ionomer as a direct bonding system with conventional glass ionomer cement and composite resin. The study showed that shear bond strength of composite resin has the higher value than both resin reinforced glass ionomer and conventional glass ionomer cement in both 1 and 24 hours duration and it increased from 1 to 24 hours in all groups. The shear bond strength of resin reinforced glass ionomer cement was higher than the conventional glass ionomer cement in both 1 and 24 hours duration. Conditioning with polyacrylic acid improved the bond strength of resin reinforced glass ionomer cement significantly but not statistically significant in the case of conventional glass ionomer cement. How to cite this article Rao KS, Reddy TPK, Yugandhar G, Kumar BS, Reddy SNC, Babu DA. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength of Resin Reinforced Chemical Cure Glass Ionomer, Conventional Chemical Cure Glass Ionomer and Chemical Cure Composite Resin in Direct Bonding Systems: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(1):21-25.


1988 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 247-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. A Cook ◽  
C. C. Youngson

The shear/peel bond strength of a ‘no-mix’ composite orthodontic bonding resin was compared in vitro with that of a glass ionomer cement. The effect of pre-treatment of the enamel, with either phosphoric acid or polyacrylic acid, prior to using the glass ionomer cement was also assessed. The composite resin had a significantly higher bond strength than the glass ionomer cement. Simple prophylaxis and drying of the enamel achieved the best results when using the glass ionomer cement, whilst etching the tooth surface with phosphoric acid produced a significantly poorer bond to the enamel. Investigation of the site of failure showed the composite resin bonded very well to the tooth and less well to the bracket, whilst the glass ionomer adhered significantly better to the bracket base than to the tooth surface.


2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-15
Author(s):  
Ashish R Jain ◽  
R Pradeep ◽  
Sashi Deepth Reddy Janapala ◽  
P Sesha Reddy

ABSTRACT Background Dentinal sealers (desensitizing agents) are used to protect the pulp from possible injurious effects after tooth preparation and also prevent the penetration of dentinal tubules by bacteria and their products which are currently thought to cause most of the pulpal inflammation under the crowns. Aim The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy of effect of three different desensitizing agents on retention of crowns cemented with resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Materials and methods Forty freshly extracted maxillary first premolars were notched for retention and the teeth specimens were mounted in autopolymerising resin. The axial height of all the specimens was 4 mm with a 20° angle of convergence. Impressions of the prepared teeth were made, later waxed invested and casted. Thirty teeth were coated with three different desensitizing agents were used in this study: Cavity varnish (Namuvar, Deepti Dental Products), Glutaraldehyde (Gluma- Heraeus Kulzer), Resin (AdheSE, Ivoclar Vivadent). Ten teeth were not coated with desensitizing agents to act as control group. Independent T test used to compare the mean values between groups. Results Tensile strength for average surface area of the groups I, II, III and IV are 0.3759, 0.2375, 0.2411, 0.2348 respectively. The t-test shows ‘p’-value is statistically not significant (p < 0.05) for groups II and III, where as in group IV ‘p’-value is statistically significant (p < 0.01). Conclusion The use of AdheSE/resin-based dentinal sealer showed increase in bond strength of the crowns luted with resin-modified glass ionomer cement when compared with control group. This study advocates the use of resin-based sealer or a glutaraldehyde-based sealer before cementation of the crowns. The cavity varnish, however, reduces the bond strength and is not acceptable. How to cite this article Janapala SDR, Reddy PS, Jain AR, Pradeep R. The Effect of Three Dentinal Sealers on Retention of Crowns cemented with Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement: An in vitro Study. World J Dent 2015;6(1):10-15.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document