Artificial formed caries-like lesions around esthetic restorative materials

Dental restorations fail for a variety of reasons. Secondary caries is one of the primary causes of failure of dental restorations. One method for reducing frequency and severity of this problem is the use of fluoride containing restorative materials. The ability of a material to inhibit secondary caries formation is an important clinical therapeutic property. This investigation assessed the capacity of esthetic restorative materials to resist caries in vitro. Class V cavities were prepared in buccal and lingual surfaces of 50 extracted sound third molars. The occlusal and gingival cavosurface margin of each preparation was on enamel surface. The five materials were used: Conventional glass ionomer cement Ceramfil beta (PSP), two polyacid modified resin composites Compoglass (Vivadent) and Dyract (Dentsply/DeTrey), non fluoride releasing composite resin Valux Plus (3M) and fluoride releasing composite resin Tetric (Vivadent). After 10 weeks in an acid gel for caries-like lesion formation, the teeth were sectioned occluso-gingivally through the middle of the restorations and examined by polarized light microscopy, while immersed in water. The statistical analysis of the results showed that secondary caries initiation and progression might be reduced significantly when fluoride-containing materials were placed. The conventional glass ionomer cement (Ceramfil beta) provided the highest protection against caries attack and the non-fluoride releasing composite resin (Valux Plus) restoration provided the least (p<0.05).     

In vitro fluoride release from aesthetic restorative materials following recharging with APF gel

In this in vitro study, the fluoride ion release from three more-viscous conventional glass ionomer cements (GICs)--ChemFlex, Fuji IX GP, Ionofil Molar--four polyacid-modified resin composites (compomers)--Dyract AP, Compoglass F, Freedom, F2000--and a hybrid resin composite--Ariston pHc--were compared. The amounts of fluoride release from 3 x 2.7 mm specimens were measured over six weeks using a fluoride ion-selective electrode. After six weeks, the specimens were recharged with 2 ml of 1.23 per cent acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF) gel for four minutes. The recharged specimens were then assessed for the amounts of fluoride release over another six weeks. Statistical analyses were performed using one-way and repeated measures ANOVA. The GICs and Compoglass F showed significantly higher initial fluoride release rates during the first two days (p < 0.05). After the first two days, fluoride release rates from all materials dropped quickly and became essentially stabilized within three-five weeks, in an exponential mode. The recharging of the specimens with APF gel caused a brief, but significant, increase in fluoride release for all materials (p < 0.05), before decreasing to previous comparable rates. Compoglass F released relatively more fluoride, and Ariston pHc relatively less, after APF gel application than before. The lowest total amounts over the study were released by Dyract AP and Freedom. The newer compomers, as well as the newer more-viscous GICs, appear to act as fluoride reservoirs to varying extents.     

Fluoride release and antibacterial properties of new-generation tooth-colored restoratives

The aim of this study was to compare the amounts and pattern of fluoride release and antibacterial properties of new-generation restoratives over a 35-day period. Materials evaluated included fluoride-releasing composites (Tetric, Experimental X), compomers (Dyract, Compoglass), and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Fuji II LC). A conventional glass ionomer (Fuji II Cap) was used as a control for fluoride-release testing. Five samples of each restorative material were evaluated for daily fluoride release over a 35-day period by means of ion chromatography. Ranking of materials from least to greatest total fluoride release over 35 days was as follows: Tetric < Experimental X < Dyract < Fuji II LC < Compoglass < Fuji II Cap. Fuji II Cap had significantly greater fluoride release than all other materials evaluated. Fuji II Cap, Fuji II LC, and Compoglass had similar patterns of fluoride release characterized by a high initial release that was many times that released later. The fluoride-releasing composites evaluated stopped releasing fluoride by day 14. Antibacterial testing was conducted using the agar diffusion inhibitory test. Five samples of each restorative were assessed at baseline and weekly intervals up to 35 days. The microorganisms used were Lactobacillus casei, Streptococcus mutans, and Streptococcus sobrinus. IRM, a zinc oxide/eugenol cement, was used as the baseline control. None of the restorative materials evaluated affected the growth of L casei, S sobrinus, or S mutans at all time periods including baseline, where fluoride was detected in the agar beneath the specimen disks. There was no correlation noted between fluoride-release potential and antibacterial properties.     

Effect of resin-based material combination on the compressive and the flexural strength

The mechanical properties, elasticity and compressive strength, of restorative materials play a crucial role during mastication for clinical performance of materials in particular stress bearing areas at posterior regions. This in vitro study was objected to evaluate the changes in the compressive and flexural strength of tooth-coloured resin-based dental restorations placed on flowable composites. Specimens in the control group were produced in cylindrical form for testing compressive strength and in quadrangular prism form for flexural strength test. Tetric Ceram, Charisma, Surefil, Admira and two compomers; Dyract AP and Compoglass F in test group specimens were fabricated by placing the control materials on different flowables. The material combinations were as follows: Tetric Ceram/Tetric Flow Charisma/Flowline, Surefil/Dyract Flow, Admira/Admira Flow, Dyract AP/Dyract Flow, Compoglass F/Compoglass Flow. Compressive strength values were measured at the Instron Testing Machine with a cross-head speed of 10 mm min(-1) while flexural strength were determined in three-point bending with a cross-head speed of 1 mm min(-1). One-way anova and Tukey's multiple comparison tests were performed for the statistical analysis. The flexural strength values of Tetric Ceram/Tetric Flow (135.9 +/- 3.2), Charisma/Flowline (120.4 +/- 5.6) and Compoglass F/Compoglass Flow (108.2 +/- 5.2) combinations were statistically greater than Tetric Ceram (110.8 +/- 10.5), Charisma (95.3 +/- 5.3) and Compoglass F (86.9 +/- 4.9). The results of the present study support the idea that the placement of flowable composite as a liner under the resin-based composite restoratives increase the flexural strength.     

Fluoride release and uptake by various dental materials after fluoride application

PURPOSE: To measure the amounts of fluoride released from fluoride-containing materials before and after daily topical fluoride applications. METHODS: A conventional glass-ionomer: Fuji Ionomer Type II (F2); a resin-modified glass-ionomer: Fuji Ionomer Type II LC (LC); two "giomer" materials: Reactmer Paste (RP), and Beautifil (BT); a fluoride-containing resin composite: Unifil F (UF); and a non-fluoride resin composite: AP-X (AP) were used in this study. Each material was filled into a plastic mold, with inner diameter of 9 mm wide x 3 mm high. The specimens were stored in vials filled with 8 ml distilled deionized water for 24 hours at 37 degrees C. The specimens were then removed from the vials and the amount of fluoride released into the water, over the 24-hour period, was measured. The amount of fluoride released was measured by using specific fluoride electrode and an ion-analyzer. These procedures were repeated at Days 2, 3, 7, 14, and 21. After 21 days, all specimens were exposed to 1000 ppm F NaF solution for 5 minutes once a day. This procedure and measurement of fluoride release were continued for 14 days. After 14 days, the specimens were placed in water for 7 days and fluoride release was measured. The results were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U-test (P< 0.05). RESULTS: At the 22nd day (1 day after starting fluoride exposure), there was no difference between the F2 and RP, though there were significant differences between the two GICs and the groups BT and UF. After that day, there were significant differences between GIC and the group RP, BT and UF. All materials showed a decrease in fluoride release 7 days after end of the fluoride immersion period. F2, LC, and UF showed no significant difference of fluoride release between Day 21 and 1 day after the end of the fluoride immersion period (P= 0.310: F2 and UF, 0.548: LC). On the other hand, RP and BT revealed lower fluoride release 1 day after the end of the fluoride immersion period as compared to Day 21 (P= 0.075: RP, 1.000: BT). For AP, fluoride release was not detected after the fluoride immersion period.     

Fluoride recharge of aesthetic dental materials

The objective of the study was to compare the potential for fluoride recharge of two glass-ionomer cements, a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement, a compomer and a fluoride-containing composite in artificial saliva. Disc samples of each of the materials were placed into artificial saliva. The fluoride content of the artificial saliva was determined at various intervals up to 57 days. The discs were subjected to a 2 min exposure of NaF (500 parts/106). This recharge procedure was repeated at 64 and 120 days. The fluoride release was measured before and after recharge. The fluoride release for all of the materials increased after each exposure to NaF; however, the amount for the composite was very low. The resin-modified glass-ionomer cement displayed the greatest potential for fluoride recharge at 57 and 64 days (P<0.05). By 120 days, the amount of fluoride released in the 24 h post-recharge interval had decreased in all the materials. All the materials showed a potential for fluoride recharge. This effect, however, was minimal in the fluoride-containing composite.     

Effect of toothbrushing on fluoride release of polyacid-modified composite resins

The aim of the study was to evaluate the fluoride release of polyacid-modified composite resins (Dyract, Compoglass) submitted to brushing abrasion. Twenty samples were taken from each material and stored in a buffer solution (pH 4.0) for 12 days. Each day, the samples were transferred to a fresh solution. Ten samples of each material were brushed in an automatic tooth-brushing machine (250 strokes, 260-g load) every fourth day. The remaining samples were not subjected to brushing. Fluoride content of the solutions was measured with a fluoride sensitive electrode after the addition of TISAB. Statistical analysis demonstrated significant differences between the two materials with regard to cumulative fluoride release within the 12 days of the experiment. However, no difference was observed between the fluoride release of the brushed samples compared to the unbrushed specimens. This was true for both, the cumulative fluoride release and its release on the day following brushing. It is assumed that regular brushing of the tested materials did not influence their release of fluoride and that brushing of polyacid-modified composite resins does not lead to maintaining their initially high level of fluoride release. Received: 6 May 1999 / Accepted: 21 July 1999     

Topical fluoride application is able to reduce acid susceptibility of restorative materials

This study aimed to investigate the effect of topical fluoride application on the acid susceptibility of restorative materials. Four restorative materials were investigated in this study: 2 composite resins (Tetric EvoCeram and Filtek Silorane), a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract Extra), and a conventional glass-ionomer cement (Ketac Fil Plus). The samples were treated once with 1 of 8 different fluoride solutions (TiF4, NaF, AmF, and SnF2, each at native pH or pH 4) for 3 min or remained untreated (control). The samples were then eroded by citric acid (pH 2.6) for 5 days (6×1 min daily). Erosive substance loss, surface topographic and compositional changes were investigated using surface profilometry, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS), respectively, after fluoride pretreatment and after erosion. The results indicate high-concentrated AmF solution at native pH was effective in inhibiting erosion in the conventional glass-ionomer cement and polyacid-modified resin composite.     

Effects of daily fluoride exposures on fluoride release by glass ionomer-based restoratives

It is well documented that glass ionomer cements absorb and release fluoride following single fluoride exposures. This study examined fluoride release among three glass ionomer-based restorative materials following multiple daily exposures to three topical fluoride regimens. Using a Delrin mold, 32 cylindrical specimens, each of a glass ionomer (Ketac-Fil), resin-modified glass ionomer (Photac-Fil) and polyacid-modified resin (Dyract AP) were created. Each specimen was subjected to one of four daily treatments (n = 8): (1) no fluoride treatment (control); (2) application of a fluoride dentifrice (1000 ppm) for one minute once daily; (3) application of the same dentifrice for one minute twice daily; (4) the same regimen as (3), plus immersion in a 0.05% sodium fluoride (NaF) mouth rinse (225 ppm) for one minute immediately following the second dentifrice application. Each specimen was suspended in a polyethylene test tube containing 1.0 ml demineralizing solution (pH 4.3) at 37 degrees C for six hours, then transferred to a new test tube containing 1.0 ml remineralizing solution (pH 7.0) at 37 degrees C for 18 hours. Fluoride treatments were completed at the time of transfer daily for seven days. Media solutions were buffered with equal volumes of TISAB II; fluoride levels were measured using a digital ion analyzer and fluoride electrode. Fluoride release decreased significantly from Day 1 to Day 3 for all materials regardless of fluoride treatment (Repeated Measures ANOVA, Tukey HSD, p < 0.05). All specimens released significantly more fluoride in demineralizing solution than in remineralizing solution. For Days 2-7, Treatment 4 produced greater fluoride release than both the control and Treatment 2 for all three materials (p < 0.05); For each material, the fluoride release produced by Treatments 3 and 4 was statistically similar on most days throughout the study. By Day 7, Photac-Fil demonstrated both the greatest total fluoride release and the greatest rechargability, followed by Ketac-Fil and Dyract AP. Although subsequent daily fluoride release never approached that of Day 1, increasing daily fluoride exposures enhanced fluoride release for all three restorative materials.     

Effect of home-use bleaching gels on fluoride releasing restorative materials

To evaluate the effects of two home-use bleaching gels (Nite-White and Contrast PM) on the surface roughness of one high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (Fuji IX GP), four polyacid-modified resin-based composites (Dyract AP, F2000, Elan and Compoglass F), two resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (Vitremer and Fuji II LC), a microfilled fluoride-releasing resin-based composite (Tetric) and a microfilled non-fluoridated resin-based composite (Valux) were used as controls. The null hypotheses tested were: (1) the use of bleaching gels would not result in surface roughness values different from those obtained at baseline; (2) differences in the amount of carbamide peroxide present in the gels would not influence surface roughness. Thirty specimen disks (the first 10 used for controls and the balance divided randomly into two groups) were made for each material according to the manufacturers' instructions. Finishing and polishing of the test and control specimens was performed after 24 hours using a sequential series of three (medium, fine and superfine) Sof-Lex disks, keeping the restoration surface wet. For every sequence, 10 strokes were made in one direction using a low-speed handpiece. Ultrasonic cleaning of the polished specimens was performed for two minutes in distilled water to remove any surface debris. Prior to bleaching treatment, the specimens were stored in 37 degrees C deionized water for 24 hours. The specimens were exposed to the bleaching gels for a period that simulated the equivalent of 15 days (eight hours/day) under bleaching treatment. The average surface roughness (Ra) of the control and treated specimens was measured. Three separate Ra measurements along the direction of rotation of the finishing and perpendicular to the finishing direction and edge of the mold were made for each specimen surface. After treatment with bleaching gels, there was an increase in surface roughness for F2000, Dyract AP, Elan, Valux and Tetric, while Fuji IX, Fuji II LC, Vitremer and Compoglass F displayed decreased surface roughness values, suggesting that the effects of the gels appear to be material-dependent. Although Contrast PM contains 5% more carbamide peroxide as the active ingredient, the second null hypothesis was rejected for Fuji IX, Vitremer, Dyract AP, Compoglass F, Elan and Valux.     

Effect of 1.23 percent APF gel on fluoride-releasing restorative materials

This study evaluated the effect of a 1.23 percent APF gel on the surface morphological characteristics and surface roughness of one high-viscosity (Fuji IX GP), three polyacid-modified resin-based composites (Dyract AP, F2000 and Compoglass F) (PMRC), and two resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (Vitremer and Fuji II LC). A microfilled nonfluoridated resin-based composite (Silux Plus) was used as a control. All materials were handled according to the manufacturers' instructions. The fluoride gel used in the study was a 1.23 percent acidulated phosphate fluoride gel (APF) (Nupro APF). The specimens were repeatedly exposed to the APF gel with cotton applicators for a period that simulated the equivalent of 4 yrs (1 min/6 mo) under prophylactic fluoride treatment. Average surface roughness (Ra) of the control and treated specimens was measured. Three separate Ra measurements along the direction of rotation of the finishing and perpendicular to the finishing direction and edge of the mold were made for each specimen surface. In each group, specimens with Ra closest to the mean were removed from the molds, sputter-coated with gold and examined using a scanning electron microscope. The results showed that all tested materials, except Vitremer, displayed increased surface roughness values following APF treatment. However, this was not statistically significant for Compoglass F, Vitremer and Fuji II LC. Among PMRC materials, F2000 displayed the highest Ra average value, although the differences between F2000 and Dyract AP and of Compoglass F and Dyract AP was not statistically significant. Comparisons of the Ra values between Silux Plus and the other test materials revealed statistically significant differences except for Dyract AP and Compoglass F. No statistically significant difference was found between the Ra values of Vitremer and Fuji II LC following APF treatment. Among all groups, Fuji IX GP displayed the highest surface roughness.     

The influence of human plasma used for dentin perfusion on tensile bond strength of different light-curing materials

PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of two perfusion solutions, saline and human plasma, on tensile bond strengths of five different light-curing materials in an in vitro investigation. METHODS: 150 human third molars were used. All teeth were prepared in a special manner allowing the simulation of intrapulpal pressure and dentin perfusion. Dentin specimens with a thickness of 3.5 mm were obtained under standardized conditions. The specimens were randomly assigned to 10 experimental groups. Five groups were perfused with physiologic saline while with the other five with human plasma under constant hydrostatic pressure of 30 cm H2O was used for at least 1 hour. Tensile bond strength of the different dentin bonding agents and composite or compomer materials (A: Syntac/Tetric, B: Prime & Bond NT/Spectrum TPH, C: Solobond Plus/Arabesk, D: Compoglass SCA/Compoglass, E: Dyract PSA/Dyract) was evaluated using an Zwick Universal testing machine 10 minutes after light-curing. RESULTS: Pairwise comparison showed a significant increase of bond strengths in all human plasma perfused subgroups (P< 0.05; Wilcoxon). The influence of the different dentin adhesives was significant (P< 0.001; ANOVA). The significantly highest values were observed for the composite groups Syntac/Tetric and Solobond Plus/Arabesk (P< 0.05; closed test procedure). The compomer Group D (Compoglass SCA/Compoglass) showed significantly decreased values compared to all other groups (P< 0.05; closed test procedure). Within the limitations of an in vitro study, it can be concluded that the use of human plasma might result in higher tensile bond strength compared to saline.     

Effect of alcoholic and low-pH soft drinks on fluoride release from compomer

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the amount of fluoride released from compomer restorative materials after immersion in various media. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this test, four materials were used: three compomers (Dyract, Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany; Compoglass, Vivadent, Schaan, Principality of Liechtenstein; and Xeno, Sankins, Tochigi, Japan) and one resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji II LC, GC, Tokyo, Japan). There were four test solutions: one alcoholic (whiskey), two low-pH drinks (Coca-Cola, orange juice), and one deionized water. Over a period of 60 days, the tested specimens were immersed in the test solution for 3 hours every day, then kept in deionized water. The fluoride released was detected by using a fluoride ion selective electrode connected to a microprocessor ion analyzer. The fluoride ion concentration (ppm) of the test solutions and deionized water was recorded after 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 30, and 60 days. Electron probe microanalysis was used for surface analysis of the fluoride released. RESULTS: When immersed in low-pH soft drinks, compomer showed a significantly higher fluoride release than when immersed in deionized water (p < .0001). For specimens immersed in Coca-Cola, the fluoride release levels (microgram/cm2, mean +/- SD) at 1, 7, and 60 days for Dyract (91.6 +/- 1.8, 39.3 +/- 3.1, 10.5 +/- 0.9), Compoglass (129.5 +/- 0.9, 66.5 +/- 2.7, 19.0 +/- 0.3), Fuji II LC (147.0 +/- 4.2, 50.8 +/- 3.1, 27.6 +/- 3.0), and Xeno (73.6 +/- 3.2, 27.3 +/- 2.1, 6.6 +/- 0.6) demonstrated the trend of significantly lower releases with time in water solution. Over a 60-day period, materials immersed in 100% orange juice released the highest amount of fluoride, which could be attributable to the erosive effect of the medium. Materials immersed in deionized water released the least amount of fluoride. Among the tested compomers, Compoglass released the most fluoride.     

Initial in situ secondary caries formation: effect of various fluoride-containing restorative materials

This study evaluated the effects of various restorative materials (Ariston pHc; Dyract; Vitremer; Tetric Ceram; Compoglass F, F2000; Hytac and Ketac Molar) on initial secondary caries formation in situ. Eighty-eight enamel slabs from sound human molars were sterilized (ethylene dioxide) and embedded in epoxy resin. Standardized tooth preparations were filled with the various restorative materials according to manufacturers' recommendations. One specimen from each group was inserted into one of two buccal aspects of an intraoral appliance worn by 11 volunteers for four weeks, day and night. Oral hygiene was performed without additional fluoride application. During meals and oral hygiene procedures, the appliances were stored in sucrose solution (10%). After in situ exposure, the samples were prepared for microradiographic assessment. Mineral content and lesion depth were evaluated by a dedicated software package (TMR 1.24). Lesion depth and mineral loss of the carious lesions close to Ariston pHc was significantly lower when compared to distant parts of the same lesions (p < 0.05; t-test, Bonferroni-Holm correction). All other materials containing fluoride showed no caries protective effect on surrounding enamel (p > 0.05; t-test, Bonferroni-Holm correction). A hydroxyl-, calcium- and fluoride-containing restorative material hampers demineralization next to the restoration, whereas, fluoride release of various fluoride-containing restorative materials does not affect demineralization of adjacent enamel in situ.     

Fluoride release from three glass ionomers, a compomer, and a composite resin in water, artificial saliva, and lactic acid

The amounts and the pattern of fluoride release from one metal-reinforced glass ionomer cement, two resin-modified glass ionomer cements, one compomer, and one composite resin placed in double-distilled water, artificial saliva, and lactic acid were evaluated in this study. Measurements of fluoride ion release were made for a total of 105 cylindrical specimens (10 mm in diameter and 1.5 mm in height). They were taken over a period of 16 weeks at the intervals of 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours, as well as 2, 3, 7, 14, 28, 56, and 112 days. The pattern of fluoride release was similar for all of the examined materials. The greatest amount of fluoride was released from the metal-reinforced glass ionomer Argion. The resin-modified glass ionomers Vitremer, Fuji II LC; the compomer Dyract; and the composite resin Tetric followed in ranking order. The pH of the environment strongly affected the fluoride release from the materials. There was a significant difference (P < 0.001) in the amounts of fluoride released in lactic acid vs water and artificial saliva, whereas, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05) in the amounts of fluoride released in water vs artificial saliva.     

Fluoride release and uptake by four new fluoride releasing restorative materials

The present study compared the initial fluoride release and release following refluoridation of a conventional glass-ionomer Ketac-Molar (ESPE), a resin-modified glass-ionomer, Vitremer (3M), and two compomers F-2000 (3M) and Hytac (ESPE). Fifteen test specimens were prepared for each brand and immersed in deionized water. The fluoride released was measured every 2 days for 22 days. Refluoridation of the test specimens was done with solutions of 0.02, 0.04 and 0.2% NaF for 5 min on days 22, 30, 38 and 46. The fluoride released from recharged specimens was measured every 2 days until day 54. The fluoride release was highest during the first days after preparation, after which it decreased sharply and then more slowly. The four materials became 'recharged' with fluoride following repeated fluoride exposure in solution, the 0.2% solution being the most effective. From a clinical point of view, the results from this study imply that all the restorative materials tested may act as intra-oral devices for the controlled slow release of fluoride at sites at risk of recurrent caries. Fluoride release and uptake by four new fluoride releasing restorative materials.     

Fluoride release from some dental materials in different solutions.

Most of the data reported on release of fluoride from dental materials are based upon measurements made in deionized water and artificial saliva, which do not simulate the dynamics of caries development. So, the purpose of this study was to determine the level of fluoride released from different restorative materials in storage solutions, considering the caries process (pH-cycling). Six cylindrical samples of each material (Chelon-Fil, Dyract, Variglass, Vitremer, and Tetric) were prepared and suspended individually in 2.0 mL of each studied solution. The studied media were deionized water, artificial saliva, and solutions for pH-cycling (demineralizing solution--pH 4.3 and remineralizing solution--pH 7.0). All solutions were changed daily over 15 days. Fluoride release was determined after buffering the solutions with an equal volume of TISAB. The fluoride release was higher in pH-cycling than in the other solutions (P < 0.05), and changes of the rank order of fluoride release from the studied materials occurred when the different media were considered (P < 0.05). The data suggest that the comparison of fluoride released from dental materials is dependent on the medium used in the evaluation.     

Effect of Alcoholic and Low-pH Soft Drinks on Fluoride Release from Compomer

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the amount of fluoride released from compomer restorative materials after immersion in various media. Materials and Methods: In this test, four materials were used: three compomers (Dyract, Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany; Compoglass, Vivadent, Schaan, Principality of Liechtenstein; and Xeno, Sankins, Tochigi, Japan) and one resin‐modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji II LC, GC, Tokyo, Japan). There were four test solutions: one alcoholic (whiskey), two low‐pH drinks (Coca‐Cola, orange juice), and one deionized water. Over a period of 60 days, the tested specimens were immersed in the test solution for 3 hours every day, then kept in deionized water. The fluoride released was detected by using a fluoride ion selective electrode connected to a microprocessor ion analyzer. The fluoride ion concentration (ppm) of the test solutions and deionized water was recorded after 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 30, and 60 days. Electron probe microanalysis was used for surface analysis of the fluoride released. Results: When immersed in low‐pH soft drinks, compomer showed a significantly higher fluoride release than when immersed in deionized water (p <.0001). For specimens immersed in Coca‐Cola, the fluoride release levels (pg/cm², mean ± SD) at 1, 7, and 60 days for Dyract (91.6 ± 1.8, 39.3 ± 3.1, 10.5 ± 0.9), Compoglass (129.5 ± 0.9, 66.5 ± 2.7, 19.0 ± 0.3), Fuji II LC (147.0 ± 4.2, 50.8 ± 3.1, 27.6 ± 3.0), and Xeno (73.6 ± 3.2, 27.3 ± 2.1, 6.6 ± 0.6) demonstrated the trend of significantly lower releases with time in water solution. Over a 60‐day period, materials immersed in 100% orange juice released the highest amount of fluoride, which could be attributable to the erosive effect of the medium. Materials immersed in deionized water released the least amount of fluoride. Among the tested compomers, Compoglass released the most fluoride. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE The results of this study indicate that, at low pH, compomer restorative materials tend to release more fluoride.     

Fluoride release and uptake capacities of fluoride-releasing restorative materials

Many fluoride-releasing dental materials are being sold on the basis of their cariostatic properties. However, the amount fluoride release of these materials is still uncertain. This study investigated the fluoride release and uptake characteristics of four flowable resin composites (Heliomolar Flow, Tetric Flow, Wave, Perma Flo), one flowable compomer (Dyract flow), one conventional glass ionomer cement mixed with two different powder/liquid ratios (ChemFlex Syringeable and ChemFlex Condensable), one packable resin composite (SureFil), one ion-releasing composite (Ariston pHc) and one resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Vitremer). Seven discs (6-mm diameter and 1.5-mm height) were prepared for each material. Each disc was immersed in 3.5 ml of deionized water within a plastic vial and stored at 37 degrees C. The deionized water was changed every 24 hours and the release of fluoride was measured for 30 days. At the end of this period, the samples were recharged with 2 ml of 1.23% acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF) gel for four minutes. Then, all samples were reassessed for an additional 10 days. The fluoride release of all samples was measured with a specific fluoride electrode and an ionanalyzer. Statistical analyses were conducted using two-way repeated measure ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range tests. For all tested materials, the greatest fluoride release was observed after the first day of the study (p<0.01) but gradually diminished with time. During the test period, Tetric Flow released the lowest amount of fluoride; however, no statistically significant difference was found from Wave and Heliomolar Flow (p>0.05). Ariston pHc released the highest amount of fluoride, followed by ChemFlex Syringeable, Vitremer and ChemFlex Condensable. There were statistically significant differences among these materials (p<0.05). Fluoride release of all materials were significantly increased after the first day following refluoridation and Ariston pHc released the greatest among all materials (p<0.01). At the end of two days of refluoridation, the fluoride release rate for each material dropped quickly and stabilized within three days.     

The recharge of esthetic dental restorative materials with fluoride in vitro-two years' results.

OBJECTIVES: A range of esthetic restorative dental materials are now available to dental clinicians. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relative fluoride recharge potential of a number of these materials in vitro over two years. METHODS: Disc samples (12 mm x 2 mm) of each of the materials were placed into artificial saliva at neutral pH. The materials tested were: two glass ionomers (Chemfil; Ketac-Fil), two resin-modified glass ionomers (Photac-Fil Aplicap; Vitremer), two compomers (Dyract; Compoglass) and two composites (Heliomolar; Concise). At 13 intervals over a two years period the discs were subjected to a 2 min fluoride recharge by exposure to sodium fluoride (500 ppm F). The pre- and post-recharge fluoride release values were determined using an ion sensitive electrode. RESULTS: At all time intervals the post-recharge fluoride release of the materials was significantly different (MANOVA p<0.0001). The mean values for post-recharge fluoride release after two years were: Chemfil 10.3, Ketac 3.0, Vitremer 9.0, Photac-Fil Aplicap 12.1, Compoglass 5.0, Dyract 3.6, Concise 0.3, Heliomolar 0.2 (units = microgF/cm(2)/h). SIGNIFICANCE: Esthetic fillings vary significantly in their capacity to absorb and re-release fluoride. The glass ionomer-based materials displayed a far greater potential for fluoride recharge than the composites, in which the recharge was virtually negligible. Whilst it cannot be assumed that fluoride release is directly proportional to cariostatic potential, these results suggest that, where possible, glass ionomer-based materials should be used in patients who have a high caries rate.