scholarly journals Fluoride Release from Two High-Viscosity Glass Ionomers after Exposure to Fluoride Slurry and Varnish

Materials ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (22) ◽  
pp. 3760
Author(s):  
Hani M. Nassar ◽  
Jeffrey A. Platt
Keyword(s):  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Vickers Microhardness ◽  
Fluoride Concentration ◽  
Measurement Data ◽  
High Viscosity ◽  
Fluoride Content ◽  
Fluoride Varnish ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer

The effect of brushing with different fluoride slurries on the fluoride release (FR) of different high-viscosity glass ionomer cements (GICs) was investigated. Fifty-eight discs were fabricated from two high-viscosity GICs (GC Fuji IX (F9) and 3M ESPE Ketac-fil (KF)). Five specimens from each brand were used to measure Vickers microhardness and the remaining were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 6) based on two-factor combinations: (1) fluoride concentration in the abrasive slurry (275 or 1250 ppm fluoride as NaF) and (2) immersion in a 22,500 ppm fluoride-containing solution. Specimens were brushed for a total of 20,000 strokes over 4 days with daily FR measurement. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance and Bonferroni tests (α = 0.05). Baseline FR and microhardness values were different between the two tested material brands. Exposure to a 22,500 ppm solution was associated with higher FR but not the exposure to 1250 ppm slurries. Brushing and immersion of glass ionomer cements in a 22,500 ppm F solution led to higher FR that was more sustained for KF. Type of the glass ionomer, progressive brushing, and fluoride varnish affected FR but not the fluoride content in the abrasive slurry.

scholarly journals Fluoride release from two types of fluoride-containing orthodontic adhesives: Conventional versus resin-modified glass ionomer cements—An in vitro study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0247716
Author(s):  
Yasemin Dziuk ◽  
Sachin Chhatwani ◽  
Stephan C. Möhlhenrich ◽  
Sabrina Tulka ◽  
Ella A. Naumova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Free Water ◽  
P Value ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Fluoride Ions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Hoc

Introduction Development of white spot lesions (WSLs) during orthodontic treatment is a common risk factor. Fixation of the orthodontic appliances with glass ionomer cements could reduce the prevalence of WSL’s due to their fluoride release capacities. The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences of fluoride release properties from resin-modified and conventional glass ionomer cements (GICs). Methods The resin-modified GICs Fuji ORTHO LC (GC Orthodontics), Meron Plus QM (VOCO), as well as the conventional GICs Fuji ORTHO (GC Orthodontics), Meron (VOCO) and Ketac Cem Easymix (3M ESPE) were tested in this study. The different types of GICs were applied to hydroxyapatite discs according to the manufacturer’s instructions and stored in a solution of TISAB III (Total Ionic Strength Adjustment Buffer III) and fluoride-free water at 37°C. Fluoride measurements were made after 5 minutes, 2 hours, 24 hours, 14 days, 28 days, 2 months, 3 months and 6 months. One factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for the overall comparison of the cumulative fluoride release (from measurement times of 5 minutes to 6 months) between the different materials with the overall level of significance set to 0.05. Tukey’s post hoc test was used for post hoc pairwise comparisons in the cumulative fluoride release between the different materials. Results The cumulative fluoride release (mean ± sd) in descending order was: Fuji ORTHO LC (221.7 ± 10.29 ppm), Fuji ORTHO (191.5 ± 15.03 ppm), Meron Plus QM (173.0 ± 5.89 ppm), Meron (161.3 ± 7.84 ppm) and Ketac Cem Easymix (154.6 ± 6.09 ppm) within 6 months. Analysis of variance detected a significant difference in the cumulative fluoride release between at least two of the materials (rounded p-value < 0.001). Pairwise analysis with Tukey’s post hoc test showed a significant difference in the cumulative fluoride release for all the comparisons except M and MPQM (p = 0.061) and KCE and M (p = 0.517). Conclusion Fluoride ions were released cumulatively over the entire test period for all products. When comparing the two products from the same company (Fuji ORTHO LC vs. Fuji ORTHO from GC Orthodontics Europe GmbH and Meron Plus QM vs. Meron from VOCO GmbH, Mannheim, Germany), it can be said that the resin-modified GICs have a higher release than conventional GICs. The highest individual fluoride release of all GICs was at 24 hours. A general statement, whether resin-modified or conventional GICs have a higher release of fluoride cannot be made.

Studies on the Effect of Fluoride Released by Glass Ionomers in the Oral Cavity

1995 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Forss ◽  
L. Seppä
Keyword(s):  
Fluoride Concentration ◽  
Mutans Streptococci ◽  
In Vitro Studies ◽  
Fluoride Content ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Oral Conditions ◽  
Clinical Experiments

Numerous in vitro studies have shown that fluoride released by glass ionomers can have effects on enamel, dentin, and plaque adjacent to the material. However, the action of fluoride in vivo may be different from that found in vitro. The aim of the present series of studies was to investigate the effects of glass ionomers in oral conditions. This was tested in clinical experiments conducted on adults who had freshly made or old glass ionomers in their mouths. The results of the studies showed that fluoride released by glass ionomers may increase the fluoride content of plaque close to the material. Fluoride content decreased rapidly with decreasing fluoride release from glass ionomer, but it was increased slightly even in plaque growing on three-year-old fillings. However, the effect appeared to be very local, and no increase in salivary fluoride content due to glass-ionomer fillings was found. Although the growth of plaque was not inhibited, the proportion of mutans streptococci was significantly reduced in plaque growing on glass ionomer during the six weeks after placement of the material. No such effect, however, could be seen in the case of three-year-old glass-ionomer fillings. Although in vitro studies have shown that glass ionomers can take up fluoride and subsequently release it, applying fluoride gel to old glass-ionomer fillings did not result in an increased fluoride concentration of plaque growing on the fillings in vivo. Further studies are needed to find out whether the recharging of glass ionomers with fluoride has clinical significance.

scholarly journals Orthodontic cements: immediate protection and fluoride release

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. e1-e5
Author(s):  
Rogério Lacerda dos Santos ◽  
Matheus Melo Pithon ◽  
Júlia Barbosa Pereira Leonardo ◽  
Edna Lúcia Couto Oberosler ◽  
Delmo Santiago Vaitsman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sodium Fluoride ◽  
Fluoride Varnish ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Selective Electrode ◽  
Group V ◽  
Cem Cement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Uptake And Release

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the authors was to evaluate fluoride release of 3 glass ionomer cements with immediate protection of fluoride varnish (Cavitine, SS White), divided into 3 groups: Group M (Meron, VOCO), Group V (Vidrion C, SS White) and Group KC (Ketac-Cem, 3M ESPE). METHODS: Fluoride release was measured during 60 days by means of an ion-selective electrode connected to an ion analyzer. After 4 weeks, the test specimens were exposed to a solution of 0.221% sodium fluoride (1000 ppm of fluoride). RESULTS: Results showed that the cements reached a maximum peak of fluoride release in a period of 24 h. There was a statistically significant difference between the amount of fluoride released after the applications of fluoride among the groups from the 31st to 60th day (p> 0.05). CONCLUSION: The Vidrion C and Meron cements showed better performance to uptake and release fluoride when compared with Ketac-Cem cement.

Positive correlation between fluoride release and acid erosion of restorative glass-ionomer cements

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 135-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lígia S. Bueno ◽  
Rafael M. Silva ◽  
Ana Paula R. Magalhães ◽  
Maria Fidela L. Navarro ◽  
Renata C. Pascotto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Positive Correlation

Effect of Three Clinical Curing Treatments on Fluoride Release and Surface Hardness of Glass-Ionomer Cements

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. e197-e203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Dionysopoulos ◽  
Kosmas Tolidis ◽  
Paris Gerasimou ◽  
Thrasyvoulos Sfeikos
Keyword(s):  
Surface Hardness ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer

Dental Cements

1988 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 134-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.C. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Zinc Phosphate ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Biological Properties ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Laboratory Measurements ◽  
Acid Dissolution ◽  
Luting Agents ◽  
Unchanged Form

The manifold uses of dental cements-as (a) luting agents, (b) cavity linings and bases, and (c) restorations for teeth—make them perhaps the most important materials in clinical dentistry. The research of the last 10 years has resulted in four main types, classified by matrix-forming species: (1) phosphate, (2) phenolate, (3) polycarboxylate, and (4) polymethacrylate. The zinc phosphate cements continue to be widely used for luting in an essentially unchanged form. Acidity and oral dissolution remain as problems. The zinc-oxide eugenol cements and their modifications are useful as linings and temporary materials but are susceptible to hydrolytic breakdown. Vanillate cements may be an improvement. Calcium hydroxide-salicylate cements are widely used as cavity linings, especially on exposures, and show improved resistance to acid dissolution. Polycarboxylate cements as both zinc polycarboxylate and glass-ionomer cements show adhesion potential, good physical properties, fluoride release, and, generally, good biological properties. Glass-ionomer cements when correctly manipulated show minimal oral dissolution. Polymethacrylate cements have been used principally for bonding etched cast metal restorations to etched enamel. Recently, adhesive crown-and-bridge cements have been developed. There are no well-established correlations between laboratory measurements of apparently relevant properties and clinical performance. More clinically-based research is needed to facilitate the development of new cements.

scholarly journals Effect of one-bottle adhesive systems on the fluoride release of a resin-modified glass ionomer

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Wang ◽  
Marília Afonso Rabelo Buzalaf ◽  
Maria Teresa Atta
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Difference ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer ◽  
The One ◽  
In The Beginning

A dhesive systems associated to resin-modified glass ionomer cements are employed for the achievement of a higher bond strength to dentin. Despite this benefit, other properties should not be damaged. This study aimed at evaluating the short-time fluoride release of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement coated with two one-bottle adhesive systems in a pH cycling system. Four combinations were investigated: G1: Vitremer (V); G2: Vitremer + Primer (VP); G3: Vitremer + Single Bond (VSB) and G4: Vitremer + Prime & Bond 2.1 (VPB). SB is a fluoride-free and PB is a fluoride-containing system. After preparation of the Vitremer specimens, two coats of the selected adhesive system were carefully applied and light-cured. Specimens were immersed in demineralizing solution for 6 hours followed by immersion in remineralizing solution for 18 hours, totalizing the 15-day cycle. All groups released fluoride in a similar pattern, with a greater release in the beginning and decreasing with time. VP showed the greatest fluoride release, followed by V, with no statistical difference. VSB and VPB released less fluoride compared to V and VP, with statistical difference. Regardless the one-bottle adhesive system, application of coating decreased the fluoride release from the resin-modified glass ionomer cements. This suggests that this combination would reduce the beneficial effect of the restorative material to the walls around the restoration.

Use of sonic waves in bubble formation, microhardness and fluoride release of a high‐viscosity glass‐ionomer cement

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nallu Gomes Lima Hironaka ◽  
Juliana Quintino Trizzi ◽  
Natália Miwa Yoshida ◽  
Jaime Aparecido Cury ◽  
Cinthia Pereira Machado Tabchoury ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bubble Formation ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
High Viscosity ◽  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Sonic Waves ◽  
Ionomer Cement

An in-vitro assessment of weekly cumulative fluoride release from three glass ionomer cements used for orthodontic banding

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaheh Vahid-Dastjerdi ◽  
Ali Borzabadi-Farahani ◽  
Homa Pourmofidi-Neistanak ◽  
Nazila Amini
Keyword(s):  
Fluoride Release ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cements ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
In Vitro Assessment
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document